The signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in Nairobi on January 9, 2005 was described as “a historic moment of great opportunity for the country” by then-United Nations Security Council President Joel Adechi of Benin. The CPA received wide international approval and was praised as a promising chance to end one of Africa’s longest and fierce civil wars. Since the end of British colonialism in 1955, more than two million people have been killed and about the same number is said to be a realistic estimate of internally displaced persons (IDPs) during the course of Sudan’s wars.
The main objective of this paper is to analyze and evaluate the current status of the peace-process and the implementation of the CPA as a tool for peacebuilding in Sudan at a time where its success seems to be at serious jeopardy. The central research question this paper constitutes has three main parts. First, the question is whether the CPA has the formal quality and extensiveness in its paperwork to effectively conduct a peace process. The second part of the question is whether the implementation process is effective, punctual and progressive with visible results that indicate a realistic chance for sustainable peace in the Sudan. The last part discusses chances and possible reasons of a future return to armed conflict between the parties. Due to the papers limits in length, priority will not be put on thoroughly identifying and explaining the importance of all other armed groups (OAGs) involved in the conflict, without failing to recognize their existence and importance. The main focus will be put on the parties which signed the CPA as the official representatives of North and South, the National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A).It will discuss and analyze the overall development of the peace process since the signing of the CPA in 2005. Central weaknesses of the CPA’s implementation process are to be identified. These key areas will be: security instability due to the presence of OAGs; issue of border demarcation; the status question of Abyei; oil-revenue sharing; and the general negative attitude towards the CPA implementation by the NCP.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Peacebuilding Theory
1.1 Peacebuilding, Peacekeeping, Peacemaking
1.2 Track 1 Mediation and the CPA
1.3 CPA and Creating Sustainable Peace
1.4 Protocol/ Agreement Analysis
1.4.1 Machakos Protocol
1.4.2 Power Sharing
1.4.3 Wealth Sharing
1.4.4 Security Arrangements
1.5 CPA Paperwork Weaknesses
1.6 Assessment of CPA Paperwork
2. Comparison Addis Ababa Accords/ Comprehensive Peace Agreement
2.1 Introduction Addis Ababa Accords
2.2.1 Provisions of the Addis Ababa Accords
2.2.2 Security
2.2.3 Economic Regulations
2.2.4 Border Demarcation
2.3 Reasons for Addis Ababa Accords Failure
2.4. Addis Ababa Accords v.s. Comprehensive Peace Agreement
2.4.1 Differences of Economic Provisions
2.4.2 Border Demarcation
2.4.3 Evaluation
3. Implementation Process of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement
3.1 Implementation Development
3.1.1 Security and Other Armed Groups
3.1.2 The Oil-Issue
3.1.3 Border Demarcation
3.1.4 Role of the National Congress Party
4. Conclusion and Future Outlook
4.1 Political Situation of the Sudan
4.2 Future Outlook
Objectives and Research Themes
The primary objective of this paper is to analyze and evaluate the current status of the peace process and the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) as a tool for peacebuilding in Sudan. The research examines whether the CPA provides a sufficient formal framework for sustainable peace and whether its implementation is effective and progressive, particularly focusing on the commitment of the conflict parties.
- Theoretical evaluation of peacebuilding strategies within the Sudanese context.
- Diachronic comparison between the 1972 Addis Ababa Accords and the 2005 CPA.
- Analysis of key implementation areas including security, wealth sharing, and border demarcation.
- Investigation into the political role and commitment of the National Congress Party.
Excerpt from the Book
1.1 Peacebuilding, Peacekeeping, Peacemaking
The term “peacebuilding” has developed into a key word when international organizations, such as the United Nations, embark upon strategies to operate in post-conflict societies. In his “Agenda for Peace” (1992) UN Secretary General Boutros-Ghali referred to peacebuilding as a key instrument in securing world peace. Chapter 6 of the document states: “(57.) In surveying the range of efforts for peace, the concept of peace-building as the construction of a new environment should be viewed as the counterpart of preventive diplomacy, which seeks to avoid the breakdown of peaceful conditions […] Preventive diplomacy is to avoid a crisis; post-conflict peace-building is to prevent a recurrence.”
Clearly formulating a definition of peacebuilding will be helpful in determining central components of the CPA as an “outline” for post-conflict peacebuilding in the Sudan. The academic field of peace and conflict has developed a wide analytical approach towards the subject. In this context it is helpful to clearly distinguish peacebuilding from similar concepts of the same discipline. Peacebuilding is often placed in the same category as “peacemaking” and “peacekeeping”, which leads to a misconception of the theoretical meaning the concepts comprises.
Summary of Chapters
1. Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Peacebuilding Theory: This chapter defines core concepts of peacebuilding and analyzes the CPA paperwork against these theoretical standards.
2. Comparison Addis Ababa Accords/ Comprehensive Peace Agreement: This section contrasts the 1972 Addis Ababa Accords with the 2005 CPA to identify recurring patterns and potential improvements in peace agreement structures.
3. Implementation Process of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement: This chapter provides an empirical look at the status of the CPA, focusing on ongoing security challenges, oil-revenue issues, and the political obstructionism of the NCP.
4. Conclusion and Future Outlook: The concluding chapter synthesizes the findings and provides an outlook on the likelihood of secession following the 2011 referendum and the potential for a relapse into armed conflict.
Keywords
Comprehensive Peace Agreement, CPA, Sudan, Peacebuilding, Peacekeeping, Peacemaking, Addis Ababa Accords, National Congress Party, SPLM/A, Oil-Revenue Sharing, Border Demarcation, Sustainable Peace, Post-conflict, Security Arrangements, Referendum
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The work focuses on the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in Sudan and evaluates its efficacy as a tool for sustainable peacebuilding in the context of the North-South conflict.
What are the core research themes?
The core themes include theoretical peacebuilding frameworks, a comparative analysis with historical precedents like the Addis Ababa Accords, the practical implementation status of the CPA, and the role of key stakeholders.
What is the primary objective or research question?
The primary research question asks whether the CPA possesses the formal quality required for peace and if its implementation process is effective and progressive enough to prevent a return to armed conflict.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The research employs a theoretical framework based on peacebuilding literature (specifically Reychler) and a diachronic comparative method to analyze the CPA in relation to the Addis Ababa Accords.
What does the main part of the work cover?
The main part covers the structural breakdown of the CPA, the comparison with the 1972 agreement, and a critical analysis of current implementation failures, including security threats and economic disputes.
Which keywords characterize this study?
Key terms include Sudan, CPA, Peacebuilding, National Congress Party, SPLM/A, Oil-revenue, and Border demarcation.
How does the CPA differ from the Addis Ababa Accords?
While both agreements sought to maintain a united Sudan, the CPA is more extensive in its paperwork and provides the South with greater political autonomy and a recognized standing armed force compared to the 1972 agreement.
Why is the role of the National Congress Party considered problematic?
The paper argues that the NCP consistently stalls critical CPA institutions, ignores the "spirit" of the agreement, and prioritizes resource extraction over creating an environment that makes unity attractive to the South.
- Citar trabajo
- Julian Warczinski (Autor), 2007, The Comprehensive Peace Agreement Sudan 2005, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/93249
