[ad_1]
August 20, 2024 (Juba) – South Sudan has commended the resumption of Sudanese peace talks in Geneva, Switzerland, opposing uncoordinated and separate initiatives that could undermine efforts to end the raging war in the country.
The mediation, led by the United States and backed by Saudi Arabia, aims to break hostilities and deliver humanitarian aid to areas severely affected by Sudan’s conflict.
South Sudan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Ramadan Mohamed Abdullah Gochi told Sudan Tribune that changing the venue and agenda of the talks would undermine major initiatives and raise concerns about establishing a new negotiating platform in Geneva instead of starting over from where they left off.
“The agreement by the conflicting parties to come to the negotiation site demonstrates leadership and commitment to ending the conflict through a political arrangement, which requires sustained efforts to refine and integrate mutually reinforcing and complementary ideas and initiatives,” he explained
Goh said that peace talks are not a one-time event but a process during which all parties need to make efforts and take initiatives to lay a solid foundation for the final settlement of the negotiations.
“Peace talks are not a one-time event. They are processed. They must coordinate and integrate all ideas and initiatives. The challenge is when many initiatives have different objectives, rather than complementing and reinforcing each other,” he explained.
South Sudanese officials said the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) supports all initiatives, including all efforts by the United States, Egypt, the United Nations, the Arab League and friendly countries and regions.
Analysts who closely follow Sudan’s peace process point out that it is fraught with anxiety and uncertainty due to differences between the two sides.
The Sudanese military initially opposed the UAE’s involvement in mediation. It also tried to understand the negotiation agenda and put forward conditions for resuming negotiations. Under increasing pressure, the military agreed to send a delegation but chose not to engage in direct negotiations, but to conduct indirect negotiations with the opponent, even though the opponent has troops stationed nearby and in the same country.
Another arrangement was to send a delegation to Cairo, Egypt to meet with the mediators from the United States and Saudi Arabia, thereby sidestepping and avoiding the involvement of partners and actors involved in the process or having a role in the mediation.
Despite Sudan’s military advocacy for mediation by Saudi Arabia and the United States, with the involvement of Egypt alone, IGAD’s role in deploying a stabilization force to try to stop hostilities remains marginal.
(English stone)
[ad_2]
Source link
