Political unrest and violence are escalating in South Sudan, particularly in Upper Nile State. Uganda’s troop intervention has led to opposition withdrawals from peace talks, jeopardizing a 2018 power-sharing agreement. The situation reflects historical ethnic tensions, particularly between the Nuer and Dinka communities, prompting calls for dialogue and international intervention to avoid civil war.
Escalating political tensions and violence in the Upper Nile State have revived fears of potential civil war in South Sudan. Following an invitation from the South Sudanese government, Uganda deployed troops in early March 2025, including conducting airstrikes. The Ugandan intervention has led opposition groups to withdraw from negotiations regarding a unified military structure, putting the fragile 2018 power-sharing agreement established between President Salva Kiir and First Vice-President Riek Machar at risk.
A recent conflict in Nasir County involved the White Army, a Nuer militia, attacking South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF) units. This resulted in at least 50 deaths, with the White Army stating their actions were defensive. Historically, violence between the Nuer and Dinka communities has roots in the 1991 split of the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), which exacerbated ethnic divisions and led to the formation of the White Army, focused on Nuer community safety.
The situation differs from the civil war that erupted in 2013, which destroyed Nasir and its infrastructure. Unlike previously centralized attacks spurred by the government, the recent escalation appears to stem from localized provocations rather than orchestrated orders. Initial clashes in February resulted from a confrontation involving White Army members and army troops gathering firewood, leading to retaliations escalating into broader conflict.
As the White Army gained control over areas including the Wec Yar Adiu army barracks on March 4, government responses involved arrests of opposition leaders, presenting them as scapegoats for the violence. This approach overlooks the historical independence of the White Army and seems aimed more at discrediting opposition than addressing underlying issues.
To prevent another war, South Sudanese authorities should engage in constructive dialogue and avoid indiscriminate civilian attacks. Engaging community leaders with influence over militia factions and leveraging the upcoming rainy season could facilitate negotiations. This period may hinder large-scale military actions and help rebuild trust between communities.
The international community, including the UN, has criticized the violence but needs to take active measures. Clear communication regarding the wrongful detention of opposition figures is essential to prevent governmental narratives that justify excessive military action. International actors must advocate for political resolutions while promoting de-escalation strategies addressing the underlying grievances to restore stability in South Sudan.
Instances of rising violence in South Sudan emphasize the necessity for dialogue and a reevaluation of military responses that may escalate tension. Addressing underlying ethnic grievances and engaging community leaders can facilitate peace-building efforts. The international community’s proactive involvement can strategically support these efforts, setting a framework to avoid a return to civil war while respecting the historical dynamics of local militias.
Original Source: theconversation.com
