The Sudan–IGAD Peace Process

The document analyzes the IGAD-led peace process between the Government of Sudan (GoS) and the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), highlighting the critical role of US pressure and the Machakos Protocol. It warns that the initial 'elite-driven' and 'secretive' approach must be replaced by transparency and democratic engagement to prevent instability from marginalized groups, such as the SSDF and the SLM/A in Darfur. The author emphasizes that internal stability is inextricably linked to resolving contentious bilateral relations with neighbors, particularly Eritrea and Uganda, and calls for a comprehensive regional framework to secure the peace.

• The IGAD Peace Initiative succeeded where previous efforts failed by clearly identifying core conflict issues and leveraging international pressure, particularly from the United States, to secure concessions from the Government of Sudan (GoS) and the SPLM/A.
• The first stage of the IGAD process was characterized by an exclusive, elite-driven, and secretive approach that ignored human rights and excluded civil society and northern opposition groups.
• The Machakos Protocol of 20 July 2002 established a critical compromise by balancing the SPLM/A's demand for southern self-determination with the GoS's insistence on Shari'ah law in the north.
• There is a significant risk that the peace process could be undermined by marginalized groups who feel excluded from the negotiations, specifically the South Sudan Defence Force (SSDF) in the south and the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) in Darfur.
• Sustainable peace in Sudan is dependent on improving volatile bilateral relations with neighboring states, as the region has a history of states supporting each other's dissidents in a 'tit-for-tat' pattern.
• Relations between Sudan and Eritrea remain tense due to continued support for armed dissidents, while relations with Uganda are strained by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) insurgency.
• The author argues that a transition to democratic rule is the most effective insurance against the pursuit of destabilizing regional foreign policies by narrow-based groups in power.
• The document identifies a critical lack of attention to human rights within the IGAD negotiations and suggests that a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, similar to the South African model, could be a viable path forward.

APA

Institute for Security Studies (2004). The Sudan–IGAD Peace Process. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PAPER86.PDF

Chicago

Institute for Security Studies. The Sudan–IGAD Peace Process. 2004. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PAPER86.PDF.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Institute for Security Studies |title=The Sudan–IGAD Peace Process |date=March 2004 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PAPER86.PDF |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{instituteforsecuritystudies2004sudanigad, author = {{Institute for Security Studies}}, title = {{The Sudan–IGAD Peace Process}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2004}, month = mar, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PAPER86.PDF}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }