The resurgence of violence in South Sudan raises fears of returning to civil war, with roots in historical community tensions. The recent actions of the White Army, driven by community defense, have exacerbated the situation. The government’s scapegoating of opposition leaders complicates peace efforts. A proactive, dialogue-oriented approach is essential for stability, along with international support for addressing underlying grievances.
Rising violence in South Sudan has reignited concerns about a potential return to civil war, particularly in the Upper Nile State. The conflict has historical roots stemming from tensions between the Nuer and Dinka communities, intensified by a 1991 schism within the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM). The recent deployment of Ugandan troops and an increase in hostilities have complicated efforts to stabilize the region, undermining the fragile peace established by the 2018 power-sharing agreement between President Salva Kiir and First Vice-President Riek Machar.
In March 2025, violent confrontations erupted as the White Army, a militia representing the Nuer community, attacked South Sudan People’s Defence Forces in Nasir County. This resurgence of conflict has already resulted in nearly 50 fatalities. The White Army claims their actions were defensive, as they seek to protect their community from escalating government assaults and aerial bombardments supported by Uganda. This pattern mirrors previous conflicts but has escalated due to governmental responses that exacerbate tensions.
Historical grievances between the Nuer and Dinka peoples remain a significant factor in the ongoing violence. Following the SPLM split in 1991, Riek Machar formed a faction that contributed to prolonged struggles for power, which included the emergence of the White Army. This militia, although initially defensive, has outlined its independence, complicating the relationship between local communities and the government.
The situation in 2025 diverges from earlier civil war outbreaks, specifically in 2013, when the government viewed Nasir as hostile territory. Recent attacks by the White Army appear driven by provocations rather than centralized political commands. For instance, a February clash following an incident involving soldiers collecting firewood ignited animosities and led to retaliatory violence, showcasing the precarious nature of community relationships.
The government has sought to deflect blame for its military losses by scapegoating opposition figures and arresting prominent leaders, further complicating the political landscape. Such actions have historically undermined peace efforts, as they divert attention from the root causes of violence, namely the autonomy of local militias.
To avert a relapse into full-scale civil war, it is essential for the South Sudanese government to engage in dialogue and avoid arbitrary arrests of opposition members. Community leaders, particularly those linked to the White Army, must be involved in discussions aimed at reducing tensions. The forthcoming rainy season in April may present an opportunity for confidence-building measures between communities and military forces, thereby promoting stability.
International responses have been limited, with the UN mission in South Sudan urging restraint while failing to address the complex dynamics of local militias like the White Army. Increased attention to political solutions that address foundational grievances is imperative to prevent further escalation. It is crucial for the UN and other international entities to advocate for de-escalation, emphasizing the importance of dialogue in resolving underlying issues that contribute to conflict in South Sudan.
In conclusion, the rising violence in South Sudan, driven by historical tensions between the Nuer and Dinka communities, necessitates immediate and constructive dialogue to prevent further escalation towards civil war. The South Sudanese government must adopt a more conciliatory approach, avoiding scapegoating opposition leaders and instead engaging with community representatives to build trust. The international community also plays a critical role in facilitating peace, emphasizing the need for political solutions that address the root causes of conflict in the region.
Original Source: eastleighvoice.co.ke
