FOXES GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? THE IGAD MEDIATION FOR SOUTH SUDAN, 2013-15

The IGAD mediation for South Sudan (2013-2015) was severely compromised because several member states were simultaneously conflict actors and mediators. Uganda provided military support to the government, while Sudan supplied weapons to the opposition. These rivalries prevented IGAD from reaching a consensus on security arrangements, reduced its leverage to impose sanctions, and undermined the impartiality of its envoys. Despite the signing of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCSS) in 2015, the process failed to end the war, which resulted in an estimated 190,000 to 400,000 deaths by 2018.

• The IGAD mediation was crippled by the fact that member states acted as both mediators and conflict participants: Uganda provided military support to the South Sudan government, Sudan supplied weapons to the opposition, and weapons also flowed from Kenya.
• Internal divisions among IGAD member states prevented the organization from reaching a consensus on critical issues, such as the deployment of a regional Protection and Deterrence Force and the withdrawal of Ugandan troops.
• The lack of unity within IGAD reduced its leverage over the belligerent parties, who exploited these divisions to avoid genuine compromises and ignored threats of sanctions.
• The mediation lacked impartiality because the IGAD Summit included the South Sudanese government but excluded the SPLM/A-IO, and the appointment of Sudanese General al-Dabi as an envoy was seen as a political move to appease Khartoum.
• Uganda's military intervention prevented a military stalemate, as it convinced President Salva Kiir he could prevail and led Riek Machar to believe he only needed to wait for the required Ugandan withdrawal.
• External attempts to support the process, such as the 'Arusha process' led by Tanzania and South Africa, ended up subverting the IGAD mediation by encouraging 'forum shopping' and diverting attention.
• The 2015 Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCSS) was short-lived, with fighting resuming in July 2016; by 2018, deaths were estimated at 190,000, rising to nearly 400,000 when indirect causes were included.

APA

Nathan, L. (2024). FOXES GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? THE IGAD MEDIATION FOR SOUTH SUDAN, 2013-15. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/2c53ac80-2756-48b1-8c00-17fbff77871c/Foxes Guarding the Henhouse The IGAD Mediation for South Sudan 2013-15.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Nathan, Laurie. FOXES GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? THE IGAD MEDIATION FOR SOUTH SUDAN, 2013-15. Peace Research Institute Oslo, 2024. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/2c53ac80-2756-48b1-8c00-17fbff77871c/Foxes Guarding the Henhouse The IGAD Mediation for South Sudan 2013-15.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Nathan |first1=Laurie |title=FOXES GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? THE IGAD MEDIATION FOR SOUTH SUDAN, 2013-15 |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |date=September 2024 |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/2c53ac80-2756-48b1-8c00-17fbff77871c/Foxes Guarding the Henhouse The IGAD Mediation for South Sudan 2013-15.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{nathan2024foxes, author = {Nathan, Laurie}, title = {{FOXES GUARDING THE HENHOUSE? THE IGAD MEDIATION FOR SOUTH SUDAN, 2013-15}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, year = {2024}, month = sep, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/2c53ac80-2756-48b1-8c00-17fbff77871c/Foxes Guarding the Henhouse The IGAD Mediation for South Sudan 2013-15.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }