Question #31

New turn crisis in relations between the two regions of Sudan occurred at the beginning 1980s, when Khartoum actually disavowed key points(AAS) Addis Ababa peaceful agreement. The southerners responded with a new anti-government uprising, which led to the beginning of the second in recent history countries of the civil war (1983-2005). The government was opposed by the Sudanese People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), led by the rebellious Colonel J. Garang, which, unlike its predecessors - the rebels of the first civil war - did not put forward separatist demands during the first war.

The main reasons new armed uprising thus became:

· infringement by the central government of Sudan of the political and cultural autonomy of the southern region;

Dissatisfaction of the educated part of the South Sudanese society with the authoritarian methods of governing the country, which in the 1970s - early 1980s. the government of J. Nimeiri systematically resorted to;

· South Sudan's protest against the introduction of Sharia law throughout the country;

· discontent former members movement "Anya-Nya" with their financial position and career prospects in the Sudanese army.

· external factor- the interest of the neighboring countries of Sudan in the destabilization of the southern region of the country and the weakening of the Nimeiri government.

During the period under review external forces that influenced the relationship between the North and the South was constantly changing. At the same time, one can single out a group international organizations and governments of foreign countries, which during the entire period 1983-2011. or a significant part of it had the most serious levers of influence on the situation in Sudan. These include international organizations (UN, OAU, AU and IG AD), neighboring countries of Sudan ( Ethiopia, Eritrea, Uganda, Egypt, Libya, Zaire/DRC and etc.), USA, UK and, in lesser degree, France as the most interested representatives of Western countries, European Union, China, as well as Saudi Arabia and Iran as Khartoum's key partners in the Middle East. Russia, like the USSR in 1983-1991, was not directly involved in Sudanese affairs, but its status and capabilities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, as well as the position of an interested observer, allowed the country to be one of the significant players.

The interests and motives of the external actors involved in the conflict were diverse.. For some, in the first place was the interest in the resources of Sudan, in particular oil and water. Others were motivated by the security of their borders with the southern region of Sudan, fearing the destabilizing impact of the Sudanese conflict. certain role geopolitical and ideological factors played: cold war”, a shared Arab-Islamic identity, Christian solidarity and Pan-Africanism. However, when helping one or another side of the conflict, international actors were guided, first of all, by their practical economic and political interests, and only then - ideological considerations.

During the years of armed conflict 1983-2005. position of the Organization of African Unity and its successor African Union on main problem(on the right of South Sudan to self-determination) and other issues on the negotiating agenda was ambiguous and inconsistent. All-African organizations, on the one hand, emphasized the undesirability of the collapse of Sudan, calling on the parties to preserve the unity of the country, on the other hand, supported various initiatives within the negotiation process of 1986-2005. The inconsistency of the positions of the OAU and the AU did not allow them to fully realize their potential for participation in a peaceful settlement until the very end of the civil war.

The beginning of the war

Violation of the Addis Ababa Agreement

Sudanese President Jaafar Nimeiri tried to take control of the oil fields in the south of the country, which were discovered in 1978, 79 and 82.

Islamic fundamentalists in the north of the country were unhappy with the provisions of the Addis Ababa agreement, which provided religious freedom in the south of the country to Christians and pagans. The positions of the Islamists gradually strengthened and in 1983 the President of Sudan announced that Sudan was becoming an Islamic republic and introduced Sharia throughout the country

Sudan People's Liberation Army was founded in 1983 by a group of rebels to fight the government of Sudan in order to restore the autonomy of South Sudan. The group positioned itself as a defender of all the oppressed citizens of Sudan and stood for a united Sudan. SPNA leader John Garang criticized the government for its policies, which led to the disintegration of the country.

In September 1984, President Nimeiri announced the end state of emergency and liquidation of emergency courts, but soon promulgated a new judicial act, which continued the practice of emergency courts. Despite Nimeiri's public assurances that the rights of non-Muslims would be respected, these claims were viewed with extreme suspicion by southerners and other non-Muslims.

In early 1985, Khartoum felt acute shortage fuel and food, drought, famine and the escalation of the conflict in the south of the country led to a difficult internal political situation in Sudan . On April 6, 1985, General Abdel al-Rahman Swar al-Dagab, with a group of senior officers, carried out a coup d'état. They did not approve of attempts to total Islamization of Sudan. The 1983 constitution was repealed, the ruling Sudanese party socialist union disbanded, ex-president Nimeiri went into exile, but Sharia law was not abolished. After that, a transitional military council was created, headed by Sivar ad-Daghab. After that, an interim civilian government was formed, headed by Al-Jazuli Duffallah. In April 1986, elections were held in the country, after which a new government was formed, headed by Sadiq al-Mahdi from the Umma Party. The government consisted of a coalition of the Umma Party, the Democratic Union, Hassan Turabi's National Islamic Front. This coalition was dissolved and changed several times over the course of several years. Prime Minister Sadiq al-Mahdi and his party played a central role in Sudan during this time.

Negotiations and escalation

In May 1986, the government of Sadiq al-Mahdi began peace talks with NAOS led by John Garang. During the year, Sudanese and NAOS representatives met in Ethiopia and agreed on the early abolition of Sharia law and the holding of a constitutional conference. In 1988, the SPNA and the Sudan Democratic Union agreed on a draft peace plan, including the abolition of military agreements with Egypt and Libya, the abolition of Sharia, the end of the state of emergency, and a ceasefire.

However, due to the aggravation of the situation in the country and the difficult economic situation in November 1988, Prime Minister al-Mahdi refused to approve the peace plan. After that, the Sudan Democratic Union withdrew from the governments and, after which representatives of Islamic fundamentalists remained in the government.

In February 1989, under pressure from the army, al-Mahdi formed a new government, calling on members of the Democratic Union, and adopted a peace plan. A constitutional conference was scheduled for September 1989.

National Salvation Revolutionary Command Council

On June 30, 1989, a military coup took place in Sudan led by Colonel Omar al-Bashir. After that, the "Council of the Revolutionary Command of National Salvation" was created. led by al-Bashir. He also became Minister of Defense and Commander-in-Chief of the Sudanese Armed Forces. Omar al-Bashir dissolved the government, banned political parties, the activities of trade unions and other "non-religious" institutions, eliminated the free press. After that, the policy of Islamization of the country began again in Sudan.

Criminal Law 1991

In March 1991, the Criminal Law was published in Sudan, which provided for penalties under Sharia law. including hand amputations. Initially, these measures were practically not used in the south of the country, but in 1993, the government began replacing non-Muslim judges in southern Sudan. In addition, a police force was created public order to monitor the observance of Sharia norms, which followed the rule of law.

the height of the war

Under the control of the People's Army for the Liberation of Sudan were part of the equatorial territories, Bahr el-Ghazal, Upper Nile. Also, rebel units were active in the southern part of Darfur, Kordofan and the Blue Nile. Under the control of government forces were big cities in the south: Juba, Wau and Malakal.

In October 1989, after a ceasefire, hostilities resumed. In July 1992, government forces took control of southern part Sudan and captured the headquarters of the SPNA in Torit.

Under the pretext of fighting the insurgency, the Sudanese government has deployed significant army and police forces in the southern regions of the country. Often, however, these forces attacked and raided villages in order to obtain slaves and livestock. During these hostilities, according to various estimates, about 200,000 South Sudanese women and children were captured and enslaved by the Sudanese armed forces and irregular pro-government groups (People's Defense Army).

Disagreements in the NAOS

In August 1991, internal strife and a struggle for power began in the NAOS. Part of the rebels separated from the Sudan Liberation Army. An attempt was made to overthrow the leader of the NAOS, John Garang, from his post as leader. All this led to the emergence in September 1992 of the second faction of the rebels. (led by William Bani), and in February 1993 the third ( led by Cherubino Boli). April 5, 1993 in Nairobi (Kenya), the leaders of the breakaway rebel factions announced the formation of a coalition.

Similar information.

Civil war breaks out in South Sudan. The reasons for Africa are traditional: the unwillingness of the elites to share the proceeds from the plunder of the country and tribal disunity. Good reason not to engage in mortal combat with opposing sides no, so a violent and protracted conflict seems almost inevitable.

The secession of black South Sudan from Arab Sudan and the creation of an exemplary democratic African state there has been one of the favorite projects of the international community. Khartoum was quite rightly criticized for racism, religious intolerance, forced Arabization, lawlessness, authoritarianism, predatory pumping of oil from southern regions countries, corruption and other features of a typical Eastern despotism. It is generally agreed that getting rid of the tyranny of the brutal northern dictator Omar al-Bashir (wanted for war crimes, by the way) would open the way for southerners to a more or less tolerable life. US President Barack Obama went even further, promising "a peaceful and prosperous future for all the South Sudanese people."

I must say that Obama was somewhat wrong in his forecasts. What happened in South Sudan after the declaration of independence in 2011 will not be called peace and prosperity even by the most convinced optimist. Prosperity for the whole nation did not work out from the very beginning. The only competitive South Sudanese commodity on the world market is crude oil. BUT the only way deliver it to buyers - an oil pipeline passing through Sudan to the Red Sea. As the authorities in Juba explained, Omar al-Bashir had raised such prices for pumping oil that it became unprofitable to sell it. The Sudanese dictator himself, by the way, did everything possible to strengthen his bad reputation among former fellow citizens: for example, his aircraft periodically bombed the oil fields of southerners. As a result, South Sudan failed to get rich quick selling oil.

Photo: Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah / Reuters

Despite the forced removal of the "raw material curse", other sectors of the newborn country's economy did not develop rapidly either. But it is not so much the old ruler who is to blame for this, but the new ones - they spread horrendous corruption in the country. Investment is also hindered by the idiosyncratic understanding of property rights in South Sudan. For example, pastoralists wandering from pasture to pasture in the Nile Valley do not disdain the opportunity to increase their herd at the expense of colleagues they meet on the way. An interesting detail: the weaning of cows and bulls is carried out in ancient, one might say, ways - with the help of bows, arrows, swords and spears.

With the peace you hoped for american president, it got even worse. Numerous rebel groups that fought against the Sudanese troops quickly retrained into gangs leading either a sedentary lifestyle (terrorizing local population), or nomadic (arranging raids on settled fellow citizens). Against the backdrop of weakness central government and complete lawlessness in remote areas of the country, the slave trade flourished. Army units sent to disperse these gangs, to the displeasure of local residents, often themselves zealously rob fellow citizens.

But lawlessness, corruption and authoritarianism are not the main problems of the youngest country in the world. The greatest danger to South Sudan is the deep-seated mutual hatred between the main ethnic groups, the Dinka (about 15 per cent of the population) and the Nuer (10 per cent). It should be noted that the figures, of course, are very approximate, since no one knows exactly what the population of the country is in principle.

The history of relations between Dinka and Nuer is replete with cases of mutual mass murder. Even during the war against Khartoum, in rare moments of rest, representatives of the two nationalities slaughtered each other, as well as all others who came to hand. Actually, many robberies, murders and cattle rustlings in " Peaceful time were carried out on an ethnic basis. The Western press does not really like to mention this, but the Dinka and Nuer have about the same feelings for each other as the Serbs and Croats during Balkan wars in the 1990s. In South Sudan, this means low-profile ethnically motivated violence.

Three factors saved South Sudan from the country's final slide into a civil war: the presence of a common enemy (Sudan), the relatively fair distribution of posts in the government between representatives of both nationalities, and the fact that even together they barely reach a quarter total population countries. Approximately 75 percent of the population are representatives of other tribes, and in total in South Sudan there are more than 60 different dialects alone.

However, in 2013 the situation began to change rapidly. First, Khartoum and Juba agreed on a cold peace. Of course, there was no friendship between them, and there is no, but they are no longer fighting. Secondly, President Salva Kiir (Dinka) fired Vice President Riek Machar (Nuer) and also purged all governments of representatives of other tribes. This, by the way, among local observers gave rise to the term "dinakratiya". And thirdly, against the background of the expulsion of all non-Dinka from the government, the Nuer began to consolidate around themselves other nationalities, dissatisfied with the dominance of the Dinka. Thus, all the ingredients for starting a civil war were prepared.

And she did not keep herself waiting long. Last week in Juba there was night fight which President Kiir announced failed attempt coup d'état. In the main conspirators, he predictably recorded Machar and his people, deprived of power by presidential reshuffles in the government. The former vice president managed to escape from the capital, but some of his associates were less fortunate: at least 11 former officials from the Nuer tribe were arrested.

It was even worse for ordinary representatives of this tribe living in the capital. According to eyewitnesses, government forces began to carry out cleansing operations, killing "conspirators" by the hundreds. Thousands of people, fearing for their lives, poured into the refugee camps in the capital.

Meanwhile, in the state of Jongliy (Nuer bastion), similar processes began. Only representatives of the Dinka people have become victims there. Forces loyal to Machar captured main city state - Bor, where ethnic cleansing immediately began. By the way, representatives of the Dinka Nuer people are calculated according to two criteria: pronunciation features (their languages ​​are similar) and high growth. Dinka are considered the tallest people on the planet.

Against the backdrop of the outbreak of the rebellion, other armed groups that have abounded in South Sudan since the war for independence have also become more active. World leaders are urging the parties to refrain from violence and resolve the issues at the negotiating table, but, of course, no one listens to them. Dinka, Nuer and others are completely engaged in mutual destruction. They are distracted only by the shelling of UN helicopters and American convertiplanes, which are taking foreigners out of the country. The situation there can be described in one word: chaos.

The US State Department, having issued a condemnation of the shelling of its tiltrotor, faced an unexpected problem: it is not very clear who exactly to condemn. There are now such a number of armed people who are not subordinate to anyone that it is not possible to understand where, who and for (against) whom, now.

Most likely, South Sudan is waiting extremely difficult times. Dinka and Nuer cannot defeat each other, and they are not going to stop hostility and put up with each other. Of course, they could also split into two countries, but then the process of division could become irreversible. The case may end with the fact that each of the 60 nationalities inhabiting South Sudan will demand independence. No acceptable way out of the current situation is yet to be seen.

International community looks in some daze as the project of creating a peaceful, prosperous, democratic African country turns into its own complete opposite. There are already voices around the world calling for the introduction of foreign peacekeepers into South Sudan before a massacre begins there, as in the neighboring Central African Republic, or even worse - as in Rwanda in 1994. Years of experience have shown that sub-Saharan African countries with with great difficulty kept from civil war, being left to their own devices.

The status of the youngest state in the world is assigned to South Sudan. However, the country has been embroiled in civil war more than once.
AT this moment shots are heard in the capital. A tense situation has been maintained in Juba throughout the week.
The population of Juba was forced to leave their homes and go to a UN-organized refugee camp. The first reports of the death toll are coming to the media. The confrontation has already taken a life three hundred Human.
In the three years that have passed since the last military conflict, the combatants have not changed. On one side of the barricade were the formations under the control of the vice-president, on the other - the army subordinate to the incumbent president.
Residents of the capital suggest that the cause of the clashes was the delay in paying salaries to the military. They hope for a quick end to the shooting. Otherwise, South Sudan will once again be mired in civil war. The last one was completed in 2015.
The history of South Sudan begins on July 9, 2011, when 99 percent of the country's inhabitants were in favor of secession from Sudan. Prior to this, Sudan lived in a war between North and South, which began in 1956 after the removal of control from the British. The country was divided into two parts according to national and religious grounds. In the north, power was concentrated in the hands of the Arabs, who insisted on a policy of Islamization. In the south, active resistance was provided by the professing Christian black population, which refused to convert to a faith alien to them.
Half a million citizens were killed between 1955 and 1972. During these years, the first civil war took place. Ultimately, the South received autonomy, and relative peace reigned in the country for 10 years. The second war began in 1983. Over 2 million people have been killed in 22 years of hostilities. 4 million people became refugees.
This African country could potentially receive the status of the richest on the continent. However, the war put her on the brink humanitarian catastrophe. By 2011, it became clear to everyone that partition was the only possible variant. The world community welcomed this decision and promised to help the new state. So South Sudan gained independence and was admitted to the UN as a full member.
Everyone hoped that the era was coming peaceful life. The territory of the new state was comparable to France. It contains 75 percent of what once belonged to Sudan oil wells. Also, the new state got rich deposits of chromium, zinc, gold, silver, diamonds.
Despite this, less than two years after the declaration of independence, South Sudan was in power internal conflict. The confrontation was caused by the aggravated relations between the largest tribes: the Dinka and the Nuer.
The leader of the state, Salva Kiir, is from the Dinka tribe. Having come to power, he began to actively introduce fellow tribesmen into the administrative and military elite. In 2013, the vice president, Rijeka Machar, was accused of organizing a coup d'état and removed from power. He belongs to the Nuer tribe. The soldiers split up. Some supported the president, others supported his opponent. Following the army, the rest of the country was divided. Thus began the civil war.
In May last year, the two leaders were able to reach an agreement. The result was an agreement on the settlement of the conflict on interethnic grounds. Despite the fact that the parties violated the agreement more than once, peace came to the country. Kiir and Machar managed to keep their positions. In April of this year, the Vice President returned to fulfilling his official duties. During the speech, he made a promise to end the war. As a sign of reconciliation, a flock of doves was released into the sky. However, the peace did not last long. The country again plunged into chaos.

Image copyright BBC World Service Image caption Sudan claims it was only responding to an invasion of the disputed area from the South

The armed conflict in the disputed area on the border of Sudan and the recently separated South Sudan continues to grow.

Irina Filatova, professor high school Economics in Moscow and Distinguished Professor at the University of Natal in South Africa, talks about the background of the dispute between the two African states.

What are the formal reasons for the aggravation of the situation?

The formal reasons for the aggravation of the situation are quite obvious. In March this year South Sudanese troops have occupied territory that is disputed. Military operations began already then. Since then they haven't really stopped. The UN called on South Sudan to withdraw troops from the disputed territory, South Sudan said it followed the call, but Sudan claims that the troops were not withdrawn and that they were militarily defeated.

What is the rationale behind the resumption of hostilities?

There are quite a few such reasons. Most importantly, the disputed region in question - South Kordofan - is an oil-bearing region. 80% of the oil fields during the division of the country into two went to South Sudan. This, of course, caused enormous damage to the Sudanese economy. Arrangements on how to distribute profits in such a division natural resources former united country, did not have.

Negotiations on this matter have not yet been completed, and in order to determine the border in South Kordofan, a referendum was to be held to find out where the local population wants to be. But even without clarification, it is known that the population here is mainly pro-South Sudan, so Sudan does not want to allow this referendum so that at least part of these deposits remain on its territory.

The second reason for the conflict is that these areas are inhabited by nomads who have always been at war with each other. There have never been any borders there, so we can say that there are battles every month, every day.

Why didn't they try to solve the issue of border demarcation immediately when South Sudan was created in July 2011?

The choice then was: to postpone the independence of South Sudan, or to postpone the issue of the border in several disputed areas, to be decided later through a referendum. But in order to hold a referendum, peace is needed, and so far there has been no peace. Both sides are violating the agreement on the creation of a joint administration to monitor and control the situation in the disputed territories, so it is very difficult to say who exactly is to blame.

What factions oppose each other in this conflict?

Let's start with the fact that this conflict is very multifaceted: it is ethnic, political, and economic conflict, which involves a lot of interests, including foreign ones. I will give as an example one grouping - the "Lord's Resistance Army", which operates in South Sudan, and in Uganda, and in Democratic Republic Congo, and in the Central African Republic. This is already one of the points of conflict, which, it seems, has nothing to do with oil.

Another force is former guerrillas in southern Sudan. They are accused of continuing military actions aimed at joining South Sudan or remaining independent altogether.

There are also clashes between Muslims and animists or Christian groups. South Sudan is a Christian-animist country, although there are enough Muslims here, and Sudan is a predominantly Islamic country. So you see how many interests collide here.

But if we talk about the main parties to the conflict - Sudan and South Sudan - what are their strengths, what is their potential in different areas?

As for the army, the army of Sudan is much stronger - it has traditions, it is a state army. And South Sudan is a young state; in addition, the local economy was undermined by a civil war that lasted 21 years. These were precisely the areas that were suppressed by the Sudanese state machine. But the economy of the young country suffered even more, oddly enough, after the declaration of independence. The oil pipeline system, the old infrastructure, collapsed, so that after South Sudan gained independence, oil sales fell, and in both countries. Of course, from an economic and military point of view, South Sudan is a weaker state, there is no need to talk about it. But he has some pretty strong allies.

Who supports Khartoum and who supports Juba?

Here everything is divided into regions. Juba is supported mainly by states south of South Sudan. They have common interests quite close relationship. Uganda has explicitly stated that if hostilities unfold, it will provide South Sudan with military aid. Kenya stated that it would count on the possibility of reconciliation between the warring parties, but the sympathies of the Kenyans are also on the side of South Sudan. As far as the Democratic Republic of the Congo is concerned, everything is more complicated here. But both the DR Congo and the Central African Republic are joining South Sudan and Uganda in the hunt for the Lord's Resistance Army. Well, the countries in the north support Sudan, of course.

World public opinion until July of last year, it was mainly that the independence of South Sudan should be proclaimed. But now opinions are already being voiced that both sides should bear responsibility for this conflict. The Organization of African Unity, in particular, calls on both sides to resolve the conflict.

What could be the result of the current confrontation?

After all, there have been such conflicts, and very close by - in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, there were also such literally intra-continental wars. It could be exactly the same here. The conflict is very complex, there have never been borders there. These states themselves, the governments do not have the ability and strength to control what is happening on the territory of their countries. Khartoum does not control its south and Juba does not control its north.

There goes border war, which is very difficult to stop, especially since it is on different sides may intervene different states, neighbors, and nothing good will come of it, of course. Already in more early wars in the territory of the former Sudan, 2.5 million people died, in my opinion. I don't know how many more victims this new war will require.

By the time of the colonization of Africa European countries did not exist in South Sudan state formations in modern understanding. Arabs for centuries of history also failed to integrate this region. Some progress has been made with Ottoman rule Egypt, when in 1820-1821. Muhammad Ali's regime, dependent on Porta, began an active colonization of the region.

During the period of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan (1898-1955), Great Britain tried to limit the Islamic and Arab influence to South Sudan, introducing a separate administration of the North and South of Sudan, respectively, and in 1922 even issuing an Act on the introduction of visas for the Sudanese population for movement between the two regions. At the same time, the Christianization of South Sudan was carried out. In 1956, the creation of a unified Sudanese state with its capital in Khartoum was proclaimed, and the dominance of politicians from the North, who tried to Arabize and Islamize the South, was consolidated in the government of the country.

The signing of the Addis Ababa Accord in 1972 ended the 17-year First Civil War (1955-1972) between the Arab North and the Negro South and gave the South a measure of internal self-government.

After about a decade of calm, Jafar Nimeiri, who seized power in a military coup in 1969, resumed the policy of Islamization. Punishments such as stoning, public flogging and amputation of hands were introduced into the country's criminal legislation, after which the Sudan People's Liberation Army resumed armed conflict.

By American estimates In the two decades that have passed since the resumption of armed conflict in southern Sudan, government forces have killed about 2 million civilians. civilians. As a result of periodic droughts, famine, lack of fuel, expanding armed confrontation, violations of human rights, more than 4 million southerners were forced to leave their homes and flee to cities or towns. neighbouring countries- Kenya, Uganda, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, as well as Egypt and Israel. Refugees were deprived of the opportunity to work the land or otherwise earn a living, suffered from malnutrition and malnutrition, and were denied access to education and health care. Years of war has led to a humanitarian catastrophe.

Negotiations between the rebels and the government, which took place in 2003-2004. formally ended the 22-year Second Civil War (1983-2005), although some armed clashes in a number southern regions took place later.

January 9, 2005 in Kenya between People's Army liberation of Sudan and Sudan signed the Naivasha Agreement. The agreement ended the civil war in Sudan. In addition, the Naivasha Agreement set a date for a referendum on the independence of South Sudan.

The following agreements (also known as protocols) were signed between the parties to the conflict:

Machakos Protocol (Chapter I), signed at Machakos, Kenya, July 20, 2002 Partition Agreement government controlled between the parties.

Protocol for the Settlement of the Conflict in the Abyei Area (Chapter IV), signed at Naivasha on May 26, 2004.

Protocol for the Settlement of the Conflict in South Kordofan and the Blue Nile (Chapter V), signed at Naivasha on May 26, 2004

Security Arrangements Agreement (Chapter VI), signed at Naivasha on September 25, 2003.

Agreement on a Ceasefire and Measures to Ensure Security in the Region (Annex I), signed at Naivasha on 30 October 2004.

Thus, the Navasha Agreement granted autonomy to the region, and the leader of the South, John Garang, became Vice President of Sudan. South Sudan received the right after 6 years of autonomy to hold a referendum on its independence. Revenues from oil production during this period were, by agreement, to be divided equally between the central government and the leadership of the southern autonomy. This eased the tension somewhat. However, on July 30, 2005, John Garang died in a helicopter crash, and the situation began to heat up again.

To resolve the conflict in September 2007, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon visited South Sudan. The international community has brought peacekeeping and humanitarian forces into the conflict zone. During a 6-year period, the authorities of the south organized a fairly complete and effective control its territory by the current Government of South Sudan with all ministries, including military establishment and law enforcement agencies. According to all estimates, the ability and desire of the non-Arab region to live independently was not in doubt.

On December 22, 2009, the Sudanese parliament approved a law establishing the rules for holding a referendum in 2011. On May 27, 2010, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir promised to hold a referendum on self-determination of South Sudan on a scheduled date in January 2011. In preparation for the referendum, Active participation employees of UNDP and other international organizations, providing, among other things, financial assistance.

In June 2010, the US announced that it would welcome the emergence of a new state in the event of a positive outcome of the referendum. On the eve of the referendum, on January 4, 2011, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, during a visit to the South Sudanese capital of Juba, promised to recognize any results of the plebiscite, and even expressed his readiness to take part in official celebrations on the occasion of the formation of a new state if the southerners vote for independence at the referendum. In addition, he promised freedom of movement between the two countries, offered to help the southerners create a secure and stable state, and organize an equal union of two states like the European Union if the South gained independence.

From January 9 to January 15, 2011, a referendum was held in South Sudan on the issue of independence from Sudan. In addition, a referendum was to be held in areas near the city of Abyei on the issue of joining South Sudan, but it was postponed.

Official results referendum were announced on February 7, 2011, according to them, 98.83% of the total number recognized as valid ballots. The official proclamation of the new state took place on July 9, 2011; until that date, Sudan continued to exist as a single state.

As a result of the positive outcome of the referendum, the new state was proclaimed on July 9, 2011. This was followed by the mass recognition of the country's independence, starting with Sudan, and the entry of the Republic of South Sudan into the UN on July 14, 2011 as its 193rd member. Soon a national currency unit- South Sudanese pound.

A number of states announced their intention to recognize the independence of South Sudan long before July 9, 2011. The Sudanese government welcomed the outcome of the referendum and announced that it plans to open an embassy in Juba after the split of the state into two neighboring countries, except for Chad and, initially, Eritrea also welcomed the independence of the region. Already in the first days, several dozen countries recognized South Sudan. Russia set diplomatic relations with South Sudan on August 22, 2011

On the other hand, relations with Sudan, with which there are territorial and economic disputes, remain extremely tense, up to armed conflicts.

Armed conflicts took place between South Sudan and Sudan in the disputed zone of South Kordofan in May–August 2011 and in Heglig in March–April 2012.

South Sudan has disputed territories with Sudan (Abyei Region and Kafia-Kingi Region) and Kenya (Ilemi Triangle).

In a country that inherited at least 7 civil wars armed groups and having several ethnic groups, conflicts continue to occur on interethnic grounds.

As a result, South Sudan's current period of independence is characterized by political instability, armed conflicts including inter-ethnic and inter-religious. AT recent times the situation in South Sudan has become so aggravated that signs of the beginning of a civil war began to appear.

In fact, the conflict in South Sudan is an armed inter-ethnic conflict between Nuer and Dinka that began in December 2013.

On December 16, 2013, South Sudanese President Salva Kiir announced that a military coup had been prevented. According to him, an attempt forced change the authorities undertaken by his political opponent failed, the situation in the country and its capital - Juba - is under the complete control of the government.

The political situation escalated sharply in July 2013 when President Salva Kiir sacked Vice President Riek Machar and introduced sweeping cabinet changes. After these reshuffles, there were practically no representatives of the country's second largest tribe, the Nuer, in the country's leadership. The President of South Sudan himself and most of his entourage belong to another tribe - the Dinka, which is the largest in the country.

Toby Lanzer, UN humanitarian aid coordinator in South Sudan, said thousands of people have died during armed uprisings in the country. The UN previously reported 500 dead in the conflict. Tens of thousands of people have fled the conflict zone in South Sudan.

On December 31, 2013, the South Sudanese authorities and the rebels agreed to a ceasefire. fighting were suspended until the parties worked out a reconciliation plan. The meeting, which was attended by representatives of President Salva Kiir and former Vice President Riek Machar, a rebel leader, took place in Ethiopia.

On January 4, 2014, representatives of the authorities and the rebels gathered for talks in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa. Full-fledged negotiations of the parties were supposed to begin on January 5, 2014, but later it became known that the negotiations were postponed. Meetings of representatives of the warring parties have been canceled and the date of their resumption has not been announced.

On January 7, 2014, direct negotiations between the government and the rebels resumed. Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom explained that a previous attempt at direct negotiations failed because the parties were not sufficiently prepared for them.

On January 10, 2014, the government of South Sudan announced the completion of the operation to regain control of the city of Bentiu, the capital of the state of Unity, also known as El Wahda. The representative of the command of the armed forces said that the operation was a complete success. According to him, control of Bentiu means control of all the oil fields in the state.

On January 23, 2014, the government of South Sudan and the rebels signed a ceasefire agreement, thus ending the talks in Addis Ababa. The agreement is supplemented by an agreement on 11 supporters of Riek Machar, who were detained and accused of plotting a coup. It is assumed that they will eventually take part in a peaceful settlement, but first a trial must take place. Under the agreement, all foreign military forces invited by the parties to the conflict must leave the country ( we are talking about the Ugandan army, which supported Salwa Kiir and fought on the side of government forces). The ceasefire agreement is expected to take effect within the next 24 hours. Meanwhile, residents of South Sudan are skeptical about the results of the negotiations, believing that the truce will solve only part of the problems of the young state.

On February 11, 2014, new negotiations to resolve the crisis began in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, two weeks after the signing of the ceasefire agreement. The rebels agreed to continue the dialogue, despite the government's refusal to release four high-ranking opposition prisoners. Both sides accuse each other of violating the ceasefire agreement in order to end the armed conflict.

On February 18, 2014, the rebels attacked the city of Malakal, the capital of the Upper Nile region. This attack was the first since the signing of a truce on January 23, 2014.

On February 22, 2014, a UN report was released stating that both government forces and rebels in South Sudan are responsible for human rights violations and violence against civilian population in particular, the ethnically divided opponents engaged in torture, violence and murder.

According to the Office for Coordination humanitarian issues UN, as a result of the conflict in South Sudan, more than a million people were forced to leave their homes, and more than 250,000 of them fled to neighboring countries. Others remained in South Sudan, tens of thousands of people found shelter in UN bases.