http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/08/19/us-seeks-un-sanctions-against-south-sudan
U.S. Seeks U.N. Sanctions Against South Sudan
The country's president failed to sign a peace agreement with rebels
before an internationally agreed upon deadline passed Monday.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry shakes hands with South Sudan's
president, Salva Kiir, during a bilateral meeting in August 2014.
By Teresa Welsh Aug. 19, 2015 | 6:43 p.m. EDT + More
The U.S. on Wednesday was poised to introduce a United Nations
Security Council resolution to sanction South Sudan and impose an arms
embargo on the country if its president fails to sign a peace
agreement by Sept. 1 – a demonstrable change in U.S. policy from an
administration long seen as hesitant to punish those responsible for
the country’s 20-month civil war.
The soonest the Security Council could vote on the resolution would be
Friday, according to the U.S. mission to the U.N. The fast-paced
introduction came after President Salva Kiir refused to sign a peace
agreement by Monday’s internationally agreed upon deadline, saying he
needed an extra 15 days for consultation on the proposed plan. Rebel
leader Riek Machar, Kiir’s former vice president, signed the
agreement, which allocates percentages for each party and other
opposition parties in a transitional government.
A power struggle between the two men just two years after the country
won its independence sparked the civil war which has displaced over 2
million people and killed an estimated tens of thousands.
Secretary of State John Kerry spoke to Kiir on Wednesday, and the
State Department said the South Sudanese president “expressed his
intention to sign the agreement after further consultations.” In the
meantime, violence was reported in multiple South Sudanese states
Tuesday and Wednesday after the deadline passed.
After little visible action on the issue, President Barack Obama
pledged in July during his trip to Africa to hold Kiir and Machar
accountable for the war. The U.S. Treasury Department in July issued
sanctions against two South Sudanese warlords on each side of the
conflict, but neither Kiir nor Machar were affected. Obama sharpened
his rhetoric during a speech in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, saying that
“the international community must raise the costs of intransigence” if
the two men fail to reach peace by the Aug. 17 deadline.
Yet after that deadline came and went Monday with Kiir demanding the
extra time to examine the agreement, the White House didn’t issue a
public statement on the delay until Tuesday afternoon.
“[W]e are deeply disappointed that the government of South Sudan under
President Kiir yet again squandered the opportunity to bring peace to
their people by refusing to sign the agreement,” National Security
Adviser Susan Rice said in the statement. “The U.S. deplores this
failure of leadership.”
Prior White House inaction on imposing further sanctions and an arms
embargo has been attributed to Rice, who was key in bringing about
South Sudanese independence in 2011. Rice “has for months resisted
appeals from key allies, including Britain and France, and from
members of President Barack Obama’s national security team – U.S.
Secretary of State John Kerry and Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador
to the United Nations – to push for the weapons ban,” according to
Foreign Policy magazine. Rice argued that an arms embargo would be
difficult to enforce without cooperation from Uganda, South Sudan’s
military ally, and would prevent the South Sudanese government from
defending itself against the opposition. That article cited unnamed
sources who said that the State Department and U.S. mission to the
U.N. had long been open to punitive measures, but that opposition from
the National Security Council was responsible for blocking such action
from coming sooner.
Rice’s rhetoric has become increasingly forceful in calling for an end
to the civil war as violence has continued unabated this year. On
South Sudan’s independence day in July, Rice said “President Kiir and
Riek Machar and their cronies are personally responsible for this new
war and self-inflicted disaster” and that only the two leaders could
end the violence and establish a transitional government.
Humanitarian organizations say further delays in the peace process
increase the cost of the war for civilians, who have been caught
between the warring factions. They have been critical of what they say
is the Obama administration’s lack of engagement on the issue.
“In his history-making address at the African Union in Addis Ababa,
President Obama made clear that the international community expected
the peace agreement to be signed by Aug. 17th, but now that deadline
has slipped,” says Noah Gottschalk, a senior humanitarian policy
adviser at the international aid group Oxfam. “The people of South
Sudan bear the terrible consequences of any further delays, and are
watching carefully to see what the U.S. will do to ensure that
President Obama lives up to his words and this conflict is finally
brought to an end.”
Received on Wed Aug 19 2015 - 22:02:36 EDT