JUBA, South Sudan, 26 Février 2025-/African Media Agency (AMA)/- A very good afternoon to all of you here in the room and, of course, a very good afternoon to our listeners on Radio Miraya. It’s always good to be with you and meet our media partners here in South Sudan.
Today is my last day here and before this I went to Port Sudan, then I came to Juba. I also visited Abyei for two days and met authorities and communities there. Additionally, I also briefly stopped over Aweil, in the state of Northern Bahr El Ghazal.
This early afternoon, I met with His Excellency President Salva Kiir Mayardiit, and earlier in the week, I had a chance to meet with First Vice President Riek Machar and a number of cabinet ministers. I also met with the Vice President (Economic Cluster) Dr Benjamin (Bol Mel) in the early part of this afternoon as well.
So, let me open this discussion by saying that the key purpose of my visit was to convey an important message, the fundamental message, which is the continued support and continued commitment of the entire UN family to South Sudan, especially as it enters the fourth extension of its transitional period amidst a variety of challenges.
So, the commitment is fully there, both by UNMISS as well as by the UN agencies.
As all of you know, this latest extension commenced on 22 February, just a few days ago, and we felt it’s critical to emphasize the message of that UN commitment when the country is doing its best to fully implement the Revitalized Peace Agreement and hold its first elections, that are due to be happening by December 2026.
At the same time, I’m aware that there are serious challenges faced by the South Sudanese people and their leaders—there is the dire economic and humanitarian situation and I’m also aware of rising insecurity at the subnational level, and we’ve seen currents of violence in various parts of the country, which are obviously of concern. There is also the impact of the Sudanese conflict on this country, in terms of the number of IDPs, the number of refugees, returnees, the impact of the economy, the potential impact on security in South Sudan, so obviously the conflict in Sudan is adding to the already existing domestic challenges in South Sudan. We have to take that into account.
The situation in South Sudan is part of simultaneous crises across the world, and these multiple crises, as you know, unfortunately, have led to considerable pressure on the international community when it comes to humanitarian assistance, and particularly on funding. Simply put – there are too many people in need and too few resources available. Our main contributors have constraints on their public finances, and we are on the one hand committed to continuing the advocacy in support of South Sudan, but definitely that will require the partnership of all, including the authorities of South Sudan so that we can have an effective advocacy in terms of the resources that are needed to support South Sudan.
Against this backdrop, I wanted to come and assure our interlocuters of the UN’s and first and foremost, Secretary General António Guterres’, again, strong commitment to continue supporting South Sudan, making sure attention will not be diverted out of the South Sudanese situation.
So now, let me cover some of the discussions I have had in the past days—we have spoken at length about current security and humanitarian concerns, intercommunal conflict and the road to elections as part of the implementation of the Peace Agreement, and, vitally, our ongoing efforts as the UN to assist the Government of South Sudan in holding credible and peaceful elections in December 2026.
I took the opportunity to highlight some of the main messages and the main positions that you have already heard SRSG and Head of UNMISS Nicholas Haysom, who is next to me, highlight, particularly our hope that the parties to the Revitalized Agreement will break political deadlocks through consensus and move forward swiftly to ensure this latest extension leads to elections under the best possible circumstances.
Completing a peaceful democratic transition is a common goal between South Sudan and the international community; certainly, it’s a goal that we share. But it is the South Sudanese themselves, and first and foremost the authorities who must do the heavy lifting. As the UN, we are here to assist them in every way we can on their journey to a permanent peace.
We also spoke about the crisis in Sudan and Abyei-related matters such as ongoing intercommunal tensions between the Ngok Dinka and Twic Dinka communities, as well as the fallout from the conflict in Sudan on the Abyei Box. On these issues, we agreed that building trust and confidence among both communities as well as making sure there is active dialogue between all the key stakeholders is paramount. We reiterated our ongoing efforts in this regard, while noting that the issue of the final status of Abyei remains open, and of course we hope there is progress in that direction. But, in the meantime, again I reiterate that regular and effective dialogue between the parties is important to make sure that Abyei will be preserved from the current challenges that are resulting from the situation in the Box but also in the vicinity, both in Sudan as well as in neighbouring states of South Sudan.
Question and Answers
Q: My question is related to Sudan – the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and their allies say they’re going to form a parallel government in Sudan and that they might announce that [parallel] government. What is your take on this as the UN? And secondly, why did UNAMID decide to withdraw from Sudan because some Sudanese say that if that hadn’t happened the level of violence would be different today?
USG Lacroix: Thank you very much. Well, as far as the conflict in Sudan is concerned, the objective of the UN is to promote dialogue and a return to peace in Sudan. That is really what we are about and the envoy of the Secretary-General, Mr. [Ramtane] Lamamra, is working very hard to achieve these objectives.
Now, regarding the UNAMID, the AU/UN hybrid peacekeeping mission in Darfur, it’s not the UN who decided to withdraw UNAMID. It’s the new government of Sudan that was put in place after the change in the political dynamic and the departure of former President Bashir. And when the host country decides that they don’t want a peacekeeping mission on their territory anymore, well, the only thing we can do is withdraw. It is important to set the record straight because that is exactly what happened; it was not a decision by the UN, but the decision by the new authorities in Sudan.
I think the lesson that needs to be drawn from that is that the good condition in which a peacekeeping mission withdraws are conditions where the objectives have been achieved and the objectives, usually, are the implementation of a political process – the successful implementation of a political process—and the presence of strong and credible state institutions, particularly in the area of security and rule of law. You have many cases where this happened. In Africa you have Liberia, Sierra Leone, in the past, Angola, Mozambique; in Asia, Cambodia, East Timor and so on and so forth. That is how a peacekeeping mission can successfully withdraw – that is after achieving its goal. If the peacekeeping mission needs to withdraw because the host country decides that it doesn’t want the peacekeeping mission anymore, that is a totally different situation. It happened in Sudan, it happened in Mali, it happened in Haiti. In that case, where the implications of that withdrawal, of course, are altogether very different. We are seeing this in Darfur; we are seeing this in Haiti.
Q: You said you met with President Kiir. I am just wondering what was your message to him and what was the nature of that conversation? Also, you know, as you mentioned, the country cannot afford another delay, but it’s already been several months in. People say that there hasn’t been a lot of progress moving towards elections in two years. What makes you think anything is going to change this time and that there’s anymore will to have elections and if you don’t see progress, what is the position going to be? What stance would you take? Would there be repercussions?
USG Lacroix: The main message to President Kiir is what I mentioned earlier that is a full commitment from the UN family—the agencies, UNMISS—to support South Sudan in relation to moving forward with the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement, particularly the preparation for holding elections. Of course, the related message I, as Fink (SRSG Nicholas Haysom), was saying, is that this needs an equally strong involvement and commitment from the South Sudanese authorities. We are of the view, as SRSG Haysom was saying, that South Sudan cannot afford another extension, and I think there are a number of reasons for that. One of them is that, you know, the people South Sudan expect to have elections. The second one is that there are security challenges in the country which were alluded to by the SRSG, but there is also a very challenging regional environment. Moving forward towards the implementation of the transitional agreement would be the best possible avenue to mitigate the impact of a very unstable regional environment and making sure that South Sudan would be on the path to stability. I think the third element is that the Member States, the international community, and the Security Council and also the financial contributors to UNMISS and to humanitarian assistance do expect, quite clearly, that there will be progress. So that is really what I would like to say.
SRSG Haysom: I think those of us who work in this business know there are no guarantees. To be sure there are disappointments. To be sure there is slow progress. To be sure from time to time, we question what we’re doing. But we’re not allowed to mop our brows and say I’m going to go to bed because this thing is not going to work. It has to work. It has to work because 12 or 13 million people depend on the capacity of this country to organize its affairs in such a way that there is a basic level of stability, it can manage its own direction, and it can provide for at least some levels of development activity to deal with what is, quite frankly, an abundance of resources.
If the question is, are there a lot of factors which mitigate against an easy route to success? Sure. Does it mean that we believe we should give up now, or that there’s another route? No. I am convinced that the only route out of a difficult transition is through an electoral process or some process agreed by the parties living in the country. A process which rewrites a social contract, and which sets out the very platform of the national identity of that country. That’s a long order, to be sure, but South Sudan will not be the only country that had to embark on that route.
My own country, 20 years ago had to do exactly the same. It’s possible, and it’s difficult. You know, we looked just in this afternoon session at the formidable economic and humanitarian challenges faced by the country at a time in which it has to undertake the most difficult political, sensitive political challenges. Try and think about it. Your pick of an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) country, Germany, or somebody. So, write your new constitution by the end of the year, create a whole new platform for the management of electoral institutions, conduct an election including a full-scale electoral institution where there are no roads and the population is hugely illiterate. We have a problem which would challenge even the most complex and developed societies. We don’t have the option of giving up. Individually we can go home, do other jobs, do other jobs which are less challenging and unlikely to produce failure … making widgets every day and selling them. But this is the work that we chose to do. We tend to regard it as sufficiently meaningful to continue doing it. And we are sufficiently hopeful that it can be done so that we can get up in the morning, eat our breakfast with a little bit of zest and get to the office. I hope I have answered your question.
Q: What did you talk about in your meetings with the Vice First Vice President, Doctor Riek Machar and the key signatories to the peace agreement. Based on your conversation with them was there an assurance that the two have shown to you that indeed this country will go into elections and this transitional period will end?
USG Lacroix: I believe that was what we heard in those meetings was a determination to move forward. But as I think as the SRSG was saying, I mean there is a lot that needs to be done. There are specific actions that we believe could be taken, relatively soon. I think there are six of them as the SRSG suggested as a low hanging fruit, having to do with creating a favorable space for elections to be held in a peaceful and open climate, as well as issues having to do with moving forward on the security arrangement. So now you know it’s about implementing, about moving forward.
Q: My question is about subnational violence, and the situation in Nassir county of Upper Nile State. My question is also about the proactive role the UN can play in preventing violence and the rumors of disarmament exercise that was supposedly launched?
SRSG Haysom: It [disarmament] remains one of the most difficult questions. When I arrived here, I traveled to all of the provinces, and I said to the governors – what is it that is most likely to lead to the failure of this project? And they said the failure to disarm. So, I started to ask people about the disarmament, and I heard that the last exercise had been a failure. It was a failure because a successful disarmament campaign has to have popular support. In other words, it can’t be in favor of one community alone. It has to have a general support by everyone in the country. Secondly, we learned that it had to be doggedly neutral and impartial in its application. And that there’d been questions previously as to whether the agents of disarmament had been.
So, as we go forward, we continue to advise government that these are the basic lessons today of disarmament exercises. We point out that they are difficult, they’re difficult everywhere. But are they necessary? If they’re necessary, then we have to get ready, toughen up our muscles for what is a difficult exercise but necessary in the context of South Sudan. I happen to have some sympathy for the rule of law argument, which is that it’s going to be very difficult for us to build a society which is capable of offering people real modalities of punishment, revenge, restitution, retribution without prisons, without police stations, without prosecutors, without policemen.
The country has to build its own justice chain. Very difficult. The World Bank did a study on what was required for countries that were emerging from conflict. You’ve got to do three things. You’ve got to provide jobs. You have to provide safety – basic safety so that people can engage in rebuilding their society. And thirdly, they said you’ve got to build institutions. They said the institutions is the important one, because institutions outlast us. Maybe our children will carry on the efforts that we started. But they said, you know, your average rule of law institution takes 40 years to build. You’ve got to build a culture, independence and prosecuting services. You’ve got to build police who are capable of conducting an impartial investigation.
So, I have no illusions about the tasks that are required, but it’s why we are now putting more and more effort into this question of the rule of law. We are now starting to build prisons. We’re starting to build police stations, teaching people how to read and write. And if we can’t do that, my nightmare is that I’m going to go back to my town and my house in New York and I leave a country here that I worked in for so many years that doesn’t even have a basic functioning police system. So, I think it’s urgent and I think it’s important and I encourage the UN at every opportunity to take it as a serious task.
Regarding subnational violence, I will say this is that we have heard allegations that people are scared. That’s what people are saying to us. There’s apprehension at the moment – maybe you can tell me? Is there something which echoes 2013 that we don’t know about?
But we are, of course, insisting that the country properly embark on its unification process. That would create a truly unified, neutral, professional and representative security apparatus, which would be a much better placed to engage communities and [reduce] violence.
But we understand that that would also take effort and resources. I don’t think we have an alternative.
For the moment, all of us, I think, have an obligation to advise politicians to mitigate the levels of tension in the country. Because the one danger which I mentioned earlier, the one item we fear – is a return to war. It would be horrible. And you know, there is only one thing which is keeping us – is the peace agreement. If the peace agreement starts to fragment, fracture then I’m not sure what’s going to happen.
USG Lacroix: I don’t have much to add, but what the SRSG was saying about building strong institutions in the area of security in the area in the rule of law, I would just refer you to what I’ve said about how a country can transition from having a peacekeeping mission towards keeping the support of the UN, of course, but in different ways. I would completely agree that it’s absolutely key to move towards building solid rule of law and security institutions.
Q: My question is about Sudan, and that they are preparing to form a new government – a parallel government. With the UN recognize this government?
USG Lacroix: The UN is not in the business of recognizing governments. Actually, that that is not what we do. What we do is we work for peace. So, it’s about bringing together stakeholders, the goodwill and the international partners that are willing to help and then working very hard to bring about an end to hostilities and [begin] constructive dialogue between them. That is really what the UN is about, not recognizing governments or one party more than the other.
Distributed by African Media Agency (AMA) on behalf of UNMISS.
Contact: UNMISS Spokesperson, Priyanka Chowdhury at chowdhury20@un.org(link sends e-mail) or unmiss-spokesperson@un.org
