Violence in South Sudan is escalating due to historical ethnic tensions and political instability. Uganda’s military intervention has complicated peace efforts, leading to clashes between the White Army and government forces. To prevent civil war, the government must prioritize dialogue and avoid repressive measures against opposition groups, while the international community must advocate for de-escalation and address underlying grievances.
Rising violence in South Sudan reflects historical tensions, particularly between the Nuer and Dinka communities, exacerbated by a political split in the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) in 1991. As political tensions increase and violence escalates in Upper Nile State, fears grow regarding a possible return to civil war. Uganda’s military involvement in March 2025, at the request of South Sudan’s government, has led to further complications, with opposition groups halting dialogue over joint military efforts, threatening the fragile 2018 power-sharing agreement.
In early March 2025, the Nuer militia known as the White Army launched attacks against South Sudan’s People’s Defence Forces in Nasir County, resulting in nearly 50 deaths and numerous injuries. The militia asserts it acted in self-defense, emphasizing its role in protecting the Nuer community. However, the government’s aggressive military response, including aerial bombardments and arrests of opposition leaders, has escalated the conflict, undermining previous efforts to stabilize the region.
The historical context reveals a cycle of retaliatory violence rooted in grievances between the Nuer and Dinka communities. The White Army’s emergence in the 1990s as a community defense force complicates the situation, as it remains independent and often unaccountable to political leadership. Previous civil war outbreaks were characterized by unified political directives, which does not seem to be the case this time, indicating a less organized, but equally dangerous conflict stemming from local provocations.
Recent provocations, such as the attack on soldiers gathering firewood in February 2025 and subsequent military defeats for the government, have intensified hostilities. These occurrences highlight the ineffectiveness of the national army against community militias, compelling the government to arrest opposition figures in a misguided effort to reassert control and blame the escalating violence on them, which neglects the true autonomous nature of the White Army.
To prevent a full-scale civil war, the South Sudanese government should focus on dialogue and community demobilization instead of resorting to arbitrary arrests and violent repression. Engaging with community leaders, especially those influential in the White Army, during the upcoming rainy season could provide a strategic opportunity for fostering dialogue and building trust, as military operations would become logistically challenging at that time.
Internationally, responses to the crisis have been limited to condemnations without sufficient actionable measures. The UN mission in South Sudan must acknowledge the complexities of the conflict and denounce the government’s oppressive tactics against opposition members. Emphasizing de-escalation and political solutions could help address the deep-rooted grievances fueling this violence, fostering a pathway to stability in South Sudan.
The resurgence of violence in South Sudan is tied to deep-seated historical tensions and recent political missteps, particularly with the involvement of the White Army and the government’s military response. To avert civil war, it is crucial for the government to pursue dialogue, avoid scapegoating opposition groups, and engage community leaders. The international community must also step up, pushing for de-escalation and recognizing the independent dynamics of local militia activities to foster meaningful political solutions.
Original Source: eastleighvoice.co.ke
