Democratise or disintegrate

This report by the Institute for Security Studies examines the stalled implementation of the Agreement for the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) and evaluates how the African Union (AU) and other African actors can support sustainable peace. It analyzes the dynamics of the conflict, the role of regional mediation, and the potential of a proposed national dialogue to broaden political participation.

• The Agreement for the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS), signed in August 2015, is viewed by many as failing, with the government's commitment to its implementation being questioned. Violations include the creation of 28 new states in October 2015 instead of 10, the failure to establish a National Architecture for cantonment, and the replacement of Riek Machar as vice president by Taban Deng.
• The conflict in South Sudan has evolved from internal political wrangling between President Salva Kiir and Riek Machar into a struggle with serious ethnic dimensions. Drivers include corruption, exclusionary politics, and 'Dinka domination' of the government, with violence expanding into previously stable areas like Central and Western Equatoria.
• The proposed national dialogue, announced by President Salva Kiir on 14 December 2016, is contested. While some see it as an opportunity to include actors outside the ARCISS, others view it as a ruse to divert attention from necessary reforms and the peace agreement's implementation.
• International and African mediation efforts have often been uncoordinated, allowing the South Sudanese government to 'forum shop' and manipulate external actors. This is evidenced by the simultaneous but separate processes of the IGAD-led mediation and the Arusha agreement focused on SPLM reunification.
• The Regional Protection Force (RPF), proposed to stabilize Juba with 4,000 soldiers in addition to the 13,000-strong UNMISS, faces questions regarding its effectiveness in protecting civilians against government abuses and potential genocide, especially as conflict has spread beyond the capital.
• Transitional justice mechanisms mandated by ARCISS, including a Hybrid Court for South Sudan (HSS) and a Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing (CTRH), have not been implemented. The HSS remains in the discussion phase, with concerns that its establishment might be seen as premature or lack political will among African leaders.
• The report recommends that the AU should insist on a ceasefire as a precondition for the national dialogue, push for the process to be extended from four months to one or two years, and use shuttle diplomacy to engage opposition actors outside Juba.

APA

Lucey, A., & Kumalo, L. (2017). Democratise or disintegrate. Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/ear11.pdf

Chicago

Lucey, Amanda, and Liezelle Kumalo. Democratise or disintegrate. Institute for Security Studies, 2017. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/ear11.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Lucey |first1=Amanda |last2=Kumalo |first2=Liezelle |title=Democratise or disintegrate |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=March 2017 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/ear11.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{lucey2017democratise, author = {Lucey, Amanda and Kumalo, Liezelle}, title = {{Democratise or disintegrate}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2017}, month = mar, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/ear11.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }