Transcripts For CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140210

Indoor accuraciment all of these things accuracy. All of these things are issues that are important that need to be addressed, and they will, hopefully, with a robust ip trials which are Technology Transition trials will be adequately addressed. Host Mignon Clyburn is one of five fcc commissioners, shes been our best this week on the communicators along with Gautham Nagesh of the wall street journal. Cspan, created by americas Cable Companies in 1979, brought to you as a Public Service by your television provider. Coming up, the u. S. Special envoy to south sudan, donald booth. He discusses the civil conflict in the country, its root causes and the recent cease fire agreement between the government and rebels. After that members of the Senate Judiciary committee will hear from officials with the justice department, secret service and federal trade commission about their recommendation to combat cyber crime after the recent Consumer Financial data breaches at target and nieman marcus. And later the senates back at 2 p. M. Eastern to continue work on a bill dealing with cost of living increases in military pensions with a vote to advance the bill at 5 30. The Heritage Foundation is hosting a daylong conservative policy summit today to highlight some of the legislation that republicans hope to advance on capitol hill. Youll hear discussions with members of congress about bills theyve introduced on issues involving health care, education, marriage, religious freedom and privacy concerns. Some of the speakers include senators ted cruz and mike lee, u. S. Representative Jeb Hensarling and former senator jim demint who now heads the Heritage Foundation. The summit begins live at 9 30 eastern over on cspan3, and you can join the conversation by sharing your comments on facebook and twitter using the hashtag cspan chat. The new cspan. Org web site gives you access to an Incredible Library of political events with more added each day through cspans nonstop coverage of national politics, history and nonfiction books. Find cspans daily coverage of official washington or access more than 200,000 hours of archived cspan video. Everything cspan has covered since 1987. And our video is all searchable and viewable on your desktop computer, tablet or smartphone. Just look for the prominent search bar at the top of each page. The new cspan. Org makes it easy to watch whats happening today in washington and find people and events from the past 25 years. Its the most comprehensive Video Library in politics. The u. S. Special envoy to south sudan recently talked about the civil conflict in sudan, its root causes and the prospects for a peace accord. The government and rebels loyal to the countrys ousted former Vice President signed a ceasefire agreement in january after more than a month of fighting. A new african nation gained its independence from sudan in 2011. This forum was hosted by the Africa Center for strategic studies. Its about two hours and 20 minutes. Good morning. Can everybody hear me . Im mike garrison, im the acting director, and its my pleasure to welcome you to the Africa Centers round table discussion south sudan, charting a path [inaudible] the Africa Centers mission is threefold; to engage African Partner states and institutions through a focused and rigorous academic and Outreach Program or series of programs that build strategic capacity and foster longterm Collaborative Partnerships. Weve been doing this for 15 years. I think weve become an honest broker and a good friend of our African Partners and certainly within the office of the secretary of defense we have achieved a level of support and recognition for that level of support for the strategy and the policy development processment we also conduct in part of this, your part of today is conducting policyrelevant research on africas Security Issues and facilitate a dialogue within the policy community on africa security. And this today is certainly a key piece of that. These round Table Discussions facilitate a dialogue, a very important dialogue, and south sudan today and actually over the past many years has risen and fallen in the crust of Critical Issues facing our policymakers for africa security. But today whats taking place in both sudans is critically important. And joe siegel, our director of research, has put together a tremendous panel of scholars, practitioners and Senior Leaders to discuss this with you. And this is a dialogue. Its a twoway communication. So we encourage the complete dialogue and communication that will take place, or we hope to take place. We are very honored to have the very distinguished panel of speakers with us today. But especially i would like to recognize ambassador donald booth, a good friend to the Africa Center, the u. S. Special envoy to sudan and south sudan. We werent sure that he was actually going to be able to be with us, he was on the list, off the list, on the list, and i think it was even as of yesterday we were able to, he was able to break away and come be part of this mornings session. So, ambassador booth, thanks for your continuing support for the Africa Center, and we hope this is helpful to you in your very important mission. My job is to open this, to make very short comments because we want the dialogue to continue and to be robust. And so id like to turn this over to dr. Joe siegel, our director of research, who will moderate todays program and be with you all day. So thanks and, again, welcome to the Africa Center. Joe . Okay, thank you very much, mike. My name is joe siegel, im the trekker of research here at director of research here at the Africa Center for strategic studies, and i would also like to extend my welcome to everybody for coming out this morning. Id like to especially recognize those from the African Diplomatic Community who are here with us this morning, notably ambassador kuch from south sudan. So thank you. Very much, sir, for being here today. One administrative issue before we get started. Theres been a change in our program from the last transition that you would have received. One of our guests who was to be on second panel coming from africa had some logistics issues getting here, and so he isnt going to be able to join us. And as a result, we decided just to consol tate the two panels consolidate the two panels. So were going to go with one panel this morning, or its going to be two hours. Well just go all the way through, have each speaker speak for about 1520 minutes, and then well open it up for questions, comments and some broader discussion. All right. The worlds youngest country has suffered a major setback in its nationbuilding efforts since the outbreak of fighting in december of last year. And the cost of this conflict has been as devastating as it has been swift. Thousands of people have been killed, there have been hundreds of thousands of people who have lost their livelihoods, 865,000 people have been displaced according to the u. N. , and theres an estimated 3. 5 Million People who will be in need of Food Assistance between thousand thousand between now and june of this year. The fighting has also torn at the social fabric of south Sudanese Society. Divisions that were there have been polarized, and theres been a fracturing of the nascent critical governance institutions that were evolving including within the Security Sector. Stemming this devastation has been the fox of intensive diplomatic efforts in the region and by International Partners. This resulted in the cessation of hostilities agreement of january 23rd, and its continuing with efforts to sign a long orterm ceasefire and Peace Agreement. That continue to be the focus of attention now. And because of the criticalness of those issues, that will remain the focus of most International Tension in south sudan for the coming days and weeks and necessarily so. Weve organized this round table today to look forward beyond the immediate Critical Issues, to look over the horizon about whats coming next. And in other words, under the myriad of challenges that south sudan faces today, what are some of the Strategic Priorities that we should be focusing on over the next six months to two years that will help south sudan to achieve stability in a sustainable manner . And if we can help identify some of these Strategic Priorities, then well be in a better position to chart a path to get there. And so our goal today is really to stir up this discussion, to try to, you know, help sketch out a vision of where the situation can go if were going to see stability in south sudan. And in this way were drawing from west african proverb that says he who does not look ahead is always destined to remain behind. And so to help us in this forwardlooking discussion, we have a really highly knowledgeable panel who have been working on south sue tan issues for a long sudan issues for a long time. And as i said, ill have each person speak for about 1520 minutes, and then well save our questions and comments for the end. Ill introduce each person as they, as they speak. That way well be able to launch right into the discussion. And well start here to my left with ambassador donald booth who, as mr. Garrison said, is the u. S. Special envoy to south sudan and sudan. Hes a member of the senior foreign service. He served previously as the ambassador to zambia as well as to liberia. And prior to that hes held many diplomatic posts within the state department including within the bureau of international and organizational affairs. He was the director of office of west african affairs. He was the Deputy Director for the office of Southern Africa affairs, and hes been a division chief of the Bilateral Trade Affairs at state department. So with that, let me turn it over to ambassador booth. Thank you all very much. Good morning. Thank you more coming. Thank you for the interest in south sudan. I think that we really are all terribly, terribly disappointed that three years after the historic referendum for independence and nine years since the signing of the comprehensive Peace Agreement that south sudan is again riven by conflict, only this time its not with the government in khartoum, but it is a conflict within itself. The fact that south sudan faces internal challenges is not in and of itself surprising i think to anyone here today. Interim political tensions internal political tensions have been building for months. Political space and space for Civil Society had been shrinking since independence. Intercommune call tensions have been longstanding, and the countrys institutions, i think, were understandably weak. Nevertheless, the speed with which this conflict escalated once the events of the night of december 15th occurred was, i think, astonishing. The conflict is devastating for the people of south sudan and for those of us in the International Community who have all made Tremendous Investments in the country in the hope of seeing it escape the terrible cycles of violence that marked its past. The cessation of hostilities agreed upon by the parties on january 23rd was a critical step. Unfortunately, the fighting continues in south sudan. Were deeply concerned about the reports of fighting particularly in upper nile and unity states, and this includes the recent spla or Government Force attack on lear which is the hometown of the former Vice President and opposition leader. The conflict has already exacted a terrible price on the people of south sudan who already face some of the most daunting Development Challenges in the world. The numbers are africanamerican, and while are grim, and while we may never know if exact number of casualties, undoubtedly, thousands have been killed. The International Crisis group a few be weeks ago gave an estimate of 10,000. It could well be above that. We do know that at least 875,000 south sudanese have fled their homes and that of that number, over 130,000 have sought refuge in neighboring countries. There are reports of forced recruitment, Sexual Violence and use of child soldiers by both sides. As political rivalries have taken on ethnic dimensions, atrocities have been committed and continue to be reported against men, women and children alike. Now that a cessation of hostilities has been signed, we must not lose focus or allow momentum to fade on making progress not only on implementing that cessation, but on making progress on the key issues that must be addressed for south sudan to return to stability and a path to development. First, the cessation of hostilities, as i said, must be fully implemented and monitored. In order to create the space for meaningful and inclusive political dialogue and to begin creating the security conditions and confidence that will allow that 10 of the population that has fled their homes to begin to return. We welcome the arrival, the advance team of the joint Technical Committee of the monitoring and Verification Mechanism which alived in juba this past week, and it will help establish the monitoring teams which will ultimately allow both sides a mechanism to report breaches of the cessation of hostilities agreement. We continue to urge all parties to conflict to help facilitate the important work of these teams. But i must say that im concerned by initial reports that the government may intend to obstruct some of the initial deployment of the monitoring mechanism. And it is also limiting the full deployment of new units who are trying to move into juba and south sudan. It is critical that these institutions, the monitoring and Verification Mechanism, have unfettered access in south sudan to full till their mandates fulfill their mandates. The monitoring adherence to the cessation of hostilities, the reporting of Human Rights Violations and in the case of unmiss, protection of civilians and facilitating the delivery of humanitarian assistance. Second, those responsible for perpetrating abuses and violations need to be held accountable, and the nation must fully invest in a reconciliation process or processes that can support political dialogue and reform Going Forward. The African Union is currently establishing a commission of inquiry for south sudan which we believe can serve as an important and credible mechanism to insure accountability for atrocities. Ask we urge that this and we urge that this mechanism move forward expeditiously on its work. Third,al hoe the period of fighting although the period of fighting thus far may have been relatively short compared to other conflicts in the region, the roots of the crisis run incredibly deep. Meaningful political dialogue both between two sides and along with prod representation of others broad representation of others in south Sudanese Society must begin immediately. A return to business as usual with a quick fix and political accommodation for the elite would be a recipe for renewed conflict in short order. Finally, all parties should permit immediate and unconditional humanitarian access to all in need, to the hundreds of thousands of south sudanese who are the real victims of the violence. For our part, the United States working to help bring an end to fighting and to encourage and support progress toward a process to build a new south sudan and to address the underlying causes of current conflict. Along with our ambassador in juba, ambassador susan page, National Security senior director smith and harris, deputy ec tear of state burns secretary of state burns, assistant secretary of state for Africa Linda Thomas greenfield and i have all traveled and engaged directly throughout the region as well as with president kir and the former Vice President and the heads of state and Foreign Ministers in neighboring countries. Secretary kerry, National Security adviser rice and other high ranking past as well as these present officials have engaged south sudanese leaders. Weve focused our efforts on supporting the egadled mediation efforts, galvanizing support to open a broader dialogue between the two sides and directly supporting the launch of the verification and monitoring mechanism. Let me just mention here the unity of effort behind the egad mediation has been incredible, and i think it has been extremely valuable in insuring the effectiveness of that mediation effort. And egad has put forward some of their very best people to run this mediation effort. Ethiopias former foreign minister of 20 years and the mediator of cpa, general Lazarus Lazarus [inaudible] from kenya. So weve been engaged with other diplomatic partners as well, the troika, the european union, china all have been engaged on the ground with their envoys in addis, in juba and throughout the region. Were working to support the cessation of hostilities agreement and the launching of needed political dialogue to address the roots of the prop. An additional 50 million of u. S. Humanitarian assistance to address the immediate pressing needs created by the conflict and we will be doing further assessments in the coming days. I continue to be encouraged by the leadership in ending the parts i believe he began to lead negotiations offer the best hope for south sudan and the region. We will continue to support the mediators and tearing out their mandate as instructed by the content of the 24 session of the assembly of heads of state on the 31st of january. Key to this mandate is its instruction for the mediators, and i quote, develop a framework for the next phase of negotiations in south sudan, including specific modalities on structure, representation and timeframe so as to ensure dialogue is truly inclusive and to ensure such a framework is developed with a few to involve a broad range of south sudanese governments, political and Civil Society actors in a reinvigorated constitutional process, unquote. Further, the communique called on needed to organize a series of public consultations with a wide range of south sudanese actors with the aim of generating input for a friend of political dialogue and National Reconciliation. Ive urged the meteors to undertake these consultations quickly and as the communique knows, to include traditional and religious leaders and groups representing women, youth, intellectuals, refugees, this is communities, diaspora and other stakeholders. At the same time we urge the government to open political space to allow for greater inclusion. The United States strongly believes the political detainees, both those currently in kenya and those remain in juba should be able to join the discussions to enlarge the course of the seeking Constructive Solutions to resolve the growing catastrophe in south sudan. Let me conclude by saying that im concerned that the crisis in south sudan still has the potential to escalate further. This crisis is truly a failure of south sudanese Political Leadership on all sides. Institutions that were understandably weak and independence were allowed to stagnate while the political environment instead will power an ever shrinking political space. Development efforts were given a back seat to individual ambitions. The government attempted to contain and well into communal violence without fully committing the hard work of addressing its causes. Which includes economic disparity, historical grievances, against other communities and political grievances due to real or perceived underrepresentation and disproportionate political influence in all levels of governance. South sudans leaders have broken their promises to their own people. While we do not know the scale of the atrocities that have been committed thus far, there is clear evidence that the targeted killings have taken place. Each violent act threatens to return south sudan to the cycle of conflict and destruction that south sudanese and all ethnicities and backgrounds voted to end when they voted for independence in 2011. Just as each act of violence made retribution, each step toward peace offers the chance to rebuild. Breaking this cycle and ensuring that africas newest nation continues to move forward rather than backwards, is the highest priority of the United States and the International Community. I want to thank everyone here today for the continued engagement and wisdom throughout this crisis, and i look forward to hearing what the other panelists have in terms of recommendations and analysis of the situation. Thank you very much. Okay, thank you very much, ambassador booth. You started us off very strongly and set up really where were hoping to go with the rest of the panelists. Ambassador booth, ambassador booth makes the point that challenges in south sudan our deepseated, and as a result, theyre going to require some fundamental changes. We cant just go back to business as usual if we expect to see stability. And thats really where we want to have it now and start to look forward what has to change and where do things need to go, with our other panelists. And so now we will turn the jok madut jok. He is executive director of the Sudd Institute in south sudan and a professor of history at Loyola Marymount university in california. He is also worked as a humanitarian aid and Development Worker earlier in his career, and he is the author of numerous articles covering the political violence, humanitarian aid conflicts and the politics of identity in sudan. Is the author of three books, including sudan, race, religion and violence. Jok, please take it away. Thank you very much, joe. Thanks to the Africa Center for inviting me, and thanks to all of you for giving up your morning to think together with us regarding the future of south sudan. Since the roundtable is designed to help us think about what the future holds for south sudan, i well, ma i think looking forward requires a bit of reflection on the past. So i will make a few remarks on how we got here, and then suggest a few steps that we can take to move forward. What happened in south sudan in december 2013 was shocking by all accounts, but not surprising to a lot of people who have been watching south sudan since, tba, referendum and independence. It was very visibly in the making for the last eight years, eight or nine years. Many wounds of the liberation wars were left untreated, and this was one those ones would be tackled and managed. For example, 1991, when the former Vice President who is now the leader of the ongoing rebellion split from the spla and the spla became involved in numerous and very extreme and violent episodes of confrontations, among themselves as well as between the civilians and the liberation army. What it left behind is gaping wounds in the hearts and minds of south sudanese, something that wouldve needed to be tackled soon after the independence came. Many episodes of violence between ethnic communities have been going on and intensified, in fact after the tpa and after the independence. They need between this community and commend those risks that were thus created was evidence all through, but this was not done. The military itself, the spla, the countrys National Defense force is the biggest institution in south sudan. And it is the most expensive institution to run, estimates anywhere between 45 and 60 of the National Expenditure goes to these institutions. But it is also the most dysfunctional of institutions to the extent that many south sudanese will say that the spla, the Security Force of the nation, has been a time, a source of insecurity. Splm, the ruling party, the nations Biggest Party actually has run it to a one party system. But it has remained unwilling or unable to transform itself into a democratic party. With many, many contentions among the leadership within that party. The largest part of population of south sudan were precluded from the gains of independence, especially the young people. Because of the unwillingness of the Political Parties to be the Peoples Party that it espoused, that it claimed itself to be. 73 of south sudans population is below the age of 30, according to the 2008 census. 40 between the age of 1430. And if you exclude all of these people from the gains of independence as has been evidenced in south sudan, i dont know what sort of society you want to build. Then continued violence after the cpa and intensification of it further after independence, in the form of cattle theft, revenge due to lack of justice, and rebellion from the spla continued all through the period of relative peace in the cpa. And attracting all the excluded young people from the gains of independence. When you have or 10 year old after 30 years have no investment in themselves and have very little to hope for or two before in a situation where it is a militarized community, there is really no way to expect these people to just live without that kind of hope and thanks to invest in themselves. That exclusion is not just abstract thing. Its not born of the highest expectation, and assumed capacity of the state and willingness of leaders to take up the responsibility for welfare. It is not an assumption. The divide is real. Its visible everywhere. With south sudan so quickly having become a deeply divided class society, leaving so many people with very little investment in their lives. And it is visible everywhere in the rural areas, the absence of services is heartbreaking in certain situations. But the lavish expenditures in the state capitals and in yuba is quite visible. So it is not some form of abstract disappointed population, assuming that the leaders are corrupt or it is something that they see every day. All of this was bound to cause an explosion. It was just a matter of time. What we didnt know was certainty, was what shape this explosion was going to take. A Popular Uprising resembling a north african protests perhaps, or more rebellions by army commanders. Certainly there have been many of those. Or intensity in the more familiar cyber militia wars, or more civil contests of power within the splm leadership. We didnt know what form is going to take. It couldve been either one of those or a combination of these. But that was only a matter of time before it blows up. But its capacity to bring the country to the brink of shattering the way it did, depended on how the government was going to react and manage this explosion. What it did, no matter what you call it, the trend to attend, revolt, mutiny or signs of a civil war, it was fully managed the coup. On december 6 when a group of splm leaders held a press conference in which he criticized the president and the government for what they call the tendencies, they made a lot of good points about what the party should have done or should be doing to govern the country. But in the state of responding in manner of dialogue, since were all members of the same party, the Vice President issued a letter in which he described these people as a bunch of disgruntled leaders who have lost office. And that was the reason why were talking, because they lost office, not because of general problems within the ruling party. Its just to do with democracy within the party. Issues to do with the corruption that people have been talking about for years, having placed south sudan among the most corrupt countries in the world, according to various reports. Transparency international, for example, ranks south sudan the fourth most corrupt country in the world. And when these issues were raised, because corruption is something that is very difficult to size it, but to be discussed within the party, it is extremely crucial. And so to dismiss it as a case of people who are disgruntled because they have been fired, back in july of 2013, was where the whole thing began to fall apart. The president also gave an address at the National Liberation council just two days the meeting began two days before the 15th of december when the whole thing blew up in our faces. And in that address, he reminded the south sudanese of such incidences as Vice President s history with 1991 split. And many people think that this is, this was the wrong time to bring up such wounds. And perhaps that is what, that is a sign of another case of mismanagement of the competition within the Political Party. But this, the army, looking forward, how do we we know how we got here but how do we get the country out of this mess . We have to look at some of the institutions of government or the army has collapsed. Theres no question about it. And as we speak, many defections are still happening in our lives. The army was put together haphazardly. Its made up of made up of militias that were used to fight the spla during the liberation war. Its made up of people who used to be members of Sudan Armed Forces and the result is huge unwieldy and institutions that is expensive to run and difficult to manage, with no clear case of command, with no shared culture within the force, the members of the force dont have one particular thing that they subscribe to. And the result of all this history is that many people kept breaking away. And the president has done, the government has done something that is commendable over the years, and that is to seek reconciliation with all the militia leaders and absorb all of them into the army, which is what has made the army so huge. But the result is that you ended up with an army that is made up of up to 50, 60 of one ethnic group that does not reflect the Ethnic Diversity of the country. And this army cannot anymore become the National Institution with the agenda of social cohesion anymore if it remains the way it is today. A much deeper and broader reconciliation between the communities, and reconciliation process that everyone will buy into. Its not the current process where archbishop of the invisible church of sudan is the leader of, the bishop of the Catholic Church of sudan. Theres nothing wrong with having these leaders lead a reconciliation. But we have to look at the histories of ethnic relations in south sudan where daniel councilman ethnic group that is accused by all of ethnic groups or all sorts of issues and to lead it, you need somebody who is more acceptable to everyone. As one person told us when we were at the Sudd Institute was investing the possibly of doing much more comparison to reckon solution process and one person told us the problem for south sudan cannot be traded away. And so a look at the more competence of reckon solution process that everyone will buy into is out of the question. Then accountability which is critical for the reconciliation. To succeed you must have the impunity of the past has to stop, because it is that entity that has become one of the big reasons for the current revenge and counter revenge that is going on currently in south sudan. But these would need to be built into whatever political settlement that will emerge if they were to be made with commitment, financial commitment, political commitment if they were to be processes that every leader, every south sudanese is committed to. They have to be part of this government that will come from other. Which the ambassador just said cannot be a simple return to the status quo. But a comprehensive one that we news the promises that independence had represented to the people of south sudan. I think i will end it there, and thank you for listening. Thank you, jock. And so, as i warned all of my panelists, im going to press you to talk about what your priority sort of what i heard you say, jok, then is your priorities are, one, diffuse the army as unifying institutions within south Sudanese Society, and to really focus on making sure that it represents Ethnic Diversity of the society, and can be a true symbol of national identity. So that was one of your recommendations for us to focus on. The second was to broaden the reconciliation process and to make that process acceptable to all groups, recognizing that the efforts that have already been made our commendable but needing to make sure that, for this to be truly sustaining it needs to be more inclusive than it currently is. And thirdly, i heard you talk about the need for more accountability, and that actions by government leaders need to be held up and there needs to be a movement as the culture of impunity that currently exists. Have i got that right . Okay, okay. We will come back and have you elaborate further. Thank you very much, jok. We will next move to kate, shee is an adjunct faculty member of the Africa Center for strategic studies. And she is the author of one of our research in south sudan which was released in september, and which really efficiently highlight some of the underlying tensions that ultimately erupted in the conflict that we saw in december. Date kate works on a host of africa Security Issues and Global Development policies issues. She has an extensive background working in south sudan, including, she was assistant administrator for usaid for africa, she was the Mission Director for sudansouth sudan. She also represent the u. S. Government and the International Evaluation commission charged with overseeing the and the mentation of the cpa agreement in the south come in sudan and south sudan. Please take it away. Thank you, joe. And thanks to the Africa Center for the opportunity to be here this morning. Is this on . Okay. I just wanted to offer a few comments and i have written far more in the Research Paper so i will try not to repeat the entire thing here but i think a few things that are worth highlighting as we think forward, how south sudan can come out of this current moment of crisis and what we might look for, framework, in terms of priorities for the medium term here. To start i will just note while the messiness of salsa dance transition is not a surprise, it is, in fact, to be expected to some extent. The Current Crisis and scale of violence in south sudan is the direct result of the absence of institutional alternatives to manage political competition given the failure of its leadership, namely president kiir and former Vice President bashar. We are trying to avoid restoring to violence in the country. It is however not due to instability and conflict. Rockers can be made during the transitional period toward a new medical while escaping cycles of violence is hard, empirical evidence tells us that it can be done. The world banks 2011 World Development report captures the expenses of countries that have successfully exited from cycles of violence and provides a framework for prioritizing statebuilding and reconstruction efforts in south sudan. If and when the immediate fighting ends and the transitional political agreement is reached. It finds that come and i quote, to break cycles of insecurity and reduce the risk of their recurrence, National Reformers and their International Partners need to build the legitimate institutions that can provide a sustained level of citizen security, justice, and jobs, end quote. Such institutional transformation, however, takes time. A best Case Scenario is within a generation and requires first a restoration of confidence and trust in government and across communities. For south sudan it will be imperative to address the underlying issues of political accountability of the executive branch and the Ruling Political Party that precipitated the outbreak of fighting and to repair the damage the state Society Relations and intercommunal relations that the violence has caused. For this to happen the current Political Leadership faces a critical choice. To use the crisis to recommit itself to developing inclusive accountable institutions by ceasing actions that perpetuate to the dominance of the executive, or to continue to alienate society from the states through the pursuit of power. Neither solves is indispensable to a stable, peaceful, democratic south sudan. But either one can do it to decades more of death and destruction. Courageous leadership is required to rise above personal ambitions and animosities to embrace mechanisms and processes that can generate renewed confidence in the state, and ultimately systems that can endure. Such accountability mechanisms can be state based such as constitutions, elections, legislatures, courts, Political Parties, subnational governments, a meritbased civilservice, a professional Security Sector, among others. They can also be society based. For instance, having an independent media and access to information, a robust Civil Society, deep social capital, and the support of external norms and standards. The development of any particular mechanism is somewhat less important than the density or the wearing of these mechanisms across the state and society. Sadly, the government records since independence is one of deliberate undermining and erosion of accountability mechanisms between state and society. This is the root of the Current Crisis and the funding issue that must be addressed once the fighting ends. Political leadership that is serious about restoring confidence in the state and in the cycles of violence would dedicate itself to build a more inclusive coalitions that support key Institutional Reforms, to expanding space for independent voices to enable and national dialogue, and to realizing tangible successes to demonstrate the states responsiveness to citizen expectations during this moment of global transition. Particulaparticula rly with respect to drafting a permanent constitution, fostering national and local reconciliation, and conducting fair and peaceful elections. Let me say just a little bit more about each. To begin with the state needs to make a far more concerted and genuine effort to build Collaborative Partnership beyond the class of belief that dominate south Sudan Political arena thus far. Partnership building process was also transcend the societal fault lines and engage this. By partnering with trusted institutions in society such as churches and nongovernmental and Civil Society organizations, identifying mutually beneficial priorities and complementary strengths such a strategy such a strategy would improve the government with local communities. This would simultaneously diminish the justification for violence by communities that feel theyve been excluded from the political process. Whether it involves matters of security, political processes, Development Needs or other issues, the practice of building inclusive coalitions would make initiatives and reforms more viable, more sustainable, more effective while fostering trust for future statebuilding efforts. Beyond actively cultivating coalitions and inclusivity the state must also protect states for citizens and community to express themselves at the processes of the state Society Dialogue are to gain traction. Access to independent information is indispensable to establishing accountability mechanism by which a stable, democratic developmental state depends. Rather than trying to monopolize a state Society Relations, the government and the splm should recognize independence Civil Society actors as representing authentic perspectives of citizens that can contribute to a stronger and more stable south sudan. Harassing, intimidating or otherwise inhibiting these voices since exactly the opposite message. That the state does not want a genuine discussion with its citizens and it intends to dominate axis the power and wealth. The outcome of such an approach is perpetual resistance and instability. And since the challenge of building a national consciousconscious ness is as much a cultural exercise as it is a political one, efforts to foster a new south sudanese identity should consummate reforms to protect and expand political and civil rights. South sudans heterogeneity provides deeper reservoirs of culture that is appreciated and respected for their diversity can foster a new national identity. Ultimately, the government needs to demonstrate that it has the interest of its citizens at heart. Current facts on the ground do not bear this out. To change it is a period of political transition is needed during which inclusive will matter as much as the outcomes generated. For this signal how commit the government is to citizen participation and input. Four Strategic Priorities are imperative to restore legitimacy to the states so the vital Institutional Reforms and security, justice and livelihoods can proceed. First, the current transitional constitution gives extraordinary powers to the president with almost no checks afforded to other branches of government. The president cannot be impeached. He can dismiss the national and state assemblies and remove state governors from office, as was any justice or judge. A National Constitutional review process must have been completed by january 2013, leading to a final permanent constitution soon thereafter. Even before the violence broke out, the review process was woefully behind schedule, raising serious questions about the adoption of a new permanent constitution before the current terms of the president and the National Assembly expire in 2015. The National Constitutional review process that should be an opportunity to educate citizens about what a constitution is and solicit their views about what kinds of checks and balances that the people of south sudan want among their government. Instead, the past the path provided for seen such replicate the ruling partys vision for how it should govern the country. It also leads to product forever open to challenges of its legitimacy. In light of the Current Crisis, that timeline for adopting a new permanent constitution and conducting National Elections will need to be revised further. These are Critical Issues that need to be resolved in the negotiations on the political transition. It is an opportunity to make the process more inclusive, participatory and transparent. Most importantly the draft constitution should be put to a popular referendum to demonstrate vital commitments a significant boost in the legitimacy of the state. And open a legitimate Constitutional Review process represents the most significant opportunity for south sudan to weigh an enduring foundation for National Unity. A close and exclusive process, however, will result in extended political grievances and perceptions of injustice. It will also seriously called into question the Political Leaderships commitment to democracy. Second, and integrated process of National Reconciliation, truth telling and justice is needed to help drive progress towards Citizens Security and justice as jok has just mention. These are two critical requirements for ending the violence. Although not mandated in the cba or in the transitional constitution, the government announced in early 2013 and initiative for National Reconciliation process in recognition of the countrys long history of intercommunal fighting and grievances. The further deterioration of intercommunal relations and new grievances that is spawned by the current fighting renders this initiative of utmost importance. Also delayed by early disagreements over the reconciliation committees mandates and membership, a new committee of national healing, peace and reconciliation led by Church Leaders was established in april 2013. It is imperative that the process be kept a political and managed by independent and trusted institutions given the roles that many of the senior political leaders, not just in the Current Crisis but in the long history of south violence. Ensuring every committee has an opportunity to air its grievances will be vital to the credibility of the process, and the difficult question of whether and what forms of justice will be administered in response to the findings of the reconciliation dialogue comprises another significant challenge for the committee, for Political Leadership, and for the south Sudanese Society at large. The question must be answered in south sudan. Third, the political transition should make preparations for elections but h they should not proceed without first restoring some confidence in the countrys political processes. Specifically, there should be first a credible anticipatory process to draft and adopting these permanent constitution, as adjusted, and the adoption of internal splm Party Reforms to restore democratic procedures and transparent and setting and selection of candidates for office. They should also be the provision of space or other Political Parties to organize, and progress on National Reconciliation and healing should precede election. Without progress in these areas first, electoral contest will continue to be seen as winnertakeall competitions that heightens the likelihood of violence. Finally, these critical processes all depend on the movement of people, goods, services and information across the country. In a territory the size of texas, there is only one paved highway running roughly one and 20 miles from the capital of judah to the ugandan border and this was constructed by usaid. Huge swaths of the country remain inaccessible by road during rainy season, including those conflict stricken regions. South sudans sheer lack of physical infrastructure will continue to be a severe obstacle to every political security, economic, humanitarian objective for the country. Roads and radio coverage must be extended to every region of south sudan as quickly as possible. So long as committees remained cut off from each other and from the government, physically and to the exchange of information, insecurity and political exclusion will persist. To conclude, a period of political transition is needed to generate renewed confidence in the state and to provide the social capital needed to build institutions most central to preventing a recurrence of the Current Crisis. Those are of Citizens Security, justice and likelihood. Most immediately, the fighting must end, political detainees must be released, humanitarian aid must reach all the needy populations and human rights abuses must be accounted for. The United States and International Community should deploy all diplomatic measures available to them to impress these priorities upon president kiir and a sheer, both brought by nearly two months of fighting. Going forward, sal said his leadership can set a new course toward legitimacy, stability and sustained element if it prioritizes above all building trust, accountability and social cohesion with and across the south sudanese population. There is no more sn job state Building Task than this. As the Current Crisis so tragically illustrates, the foundation of the state cannot be an afterthought. Thank you. Thank you. You have given us a lot to focus on, and it seems we within everything you said you emphasized the themes of trust, accountability and social cohesion, that the on these institutional processes that are important, constitution building process. Youre emphasizing the important of process to build legitimacy. You talk about reconciliation, but its the process of doing so in an integrated way and involving nonstate actors that it is inclusive. You talk about the importance of election but making sure theres trust building and Political Institutions before those elections s so that the they ons or the purpose that they are intended for. You talk about roads, communicate and, building infrastructure, not just as an end in itself but as a means of trying to help build more National Unity and cohesion within south sudan. So thank you very much. That will give us a lot to respond to in the question and answer. And then lets turn to our final panelist, mr. Jason matus. He is senior coordinator with aecom which works with the support of usaids sudan and south sudan transition of conflict mitigation program. Jason has 20 years of experience working on humanitarian, peace building and postconflict recovery activities with various International Organizations in sudan and south sudan, and he has worked as an advisor, coordinator and project manage and support of initiatives directly in support of the comprehensive Peace Agreement in sudan, south sudan. So with that, jason, please. Thank you. And again thank the organize, the African Center for strategic studies for the opportunity to participate in this discussion. I was asked to look at the next six months to three years, ma look at some goals, some constraints and look at what might be some benchmarks benchmark of success but i think the first question is will be about who sets the goals, click this is a south sudanese discussion but more importantly that the process of achieving these goals from these transitional goals is essentially the fact that will make this successful. So its the south sudanese achieving these goals is critical. That said, im going to make basically three points, three main points. The first is that i think there can be, for those who want to find a lasting solution to the conflict, i think can find common goals that it should, i think the debate focuses largely on the model and the mechanism needed to achieve those goals. And i would say there is dependent on how you see the cause, the root cause of the Current Crisis. The second point is that regardless of the models and the mechanisms how, there will still be challenges for whoever leads or for the south sudanese regardless of those models and mechanisms, that they will be hard to avoid, challenges like stability, challenges like just as they did in way of the longerterm transformative goals. And the last thing is im really going to argue, focus less on the event, and more on the conditions for which those events, the constitution, the elections, can be genuinely transform. So those are the three main points im going to cover. So looking ahead over the next three years, even in two years, by the end of 2015th the National Constitution review committee should have submitted a draft constitution based on consultation. At the same time, the same year, earlier, maybe even april, there should be elections. Before elections that need to be a sense on the table. There needs to be an splm convention and the other parties need to organize there. There needs to be National Reconciliation which is a precondition for those elections to happen in a stable way, and then you these other laws in varying degrees of either development or application that are ultimately important. Local government act, media act, land act, the ngo, the Political Party, all of these things are there in the next two years. The calendar is very crowded and full of democracy. Im being sarcastic. So if we want to look forward and look at some practical goals, a couple things there, i think we need to look at the transition period. Not the 20 year plan, not the 20 whatever, 2050 or whatever these plans are, but something very specific. How do you ensure that there is a Successful Transition . I think in the broad goals a group of diaspora put a paper and talked about the broad building good governance. I think everybody touched on it, everything from broadbased, inclusive, democratic, decentralized, meritocracy where supremacy rule of law is the. I think there isnt going to be disagreement on these broad roles for south sudan. But what comes as a challenge is how you see, i think, raking people up into two schools in terms of how you see the cause of the conflict. Im going to oversimplify this. One school looks at this conflict very much as a personal rivalry between individuals based on challenges for power, advisors, you know, political competition. A set of a few people who took the country off course, and that the violence was really about an immediate threat and the revenge without any events and responding to those immediate events. That that is what the problem that needs to be addressed, much more acute. With the other as john pointed out, a lot of people say this was the trigger. The roots of this cause date back to historic rivalries between them from the time when they were both brothers under the same family, or from 50 year liberation struggle or three years of splm struggle, or 91 or six years of cpa institution building. Or three years of nationstate building post independence. So how you see the root causes looks at how you look at the models and mechanisms. So let me start by going to the goals but im going to focus first on leadership of the transition. And the first goal for leading the transition we have to be the transition. Not being president , not leading the of the transition, not setting up your party or institution beyond that but a genuine focus on what it takes to create, promote and protect this transition. To the gulf thats been set. If you see this as much more about personal rivalries, its a powersharing formula where you balance ethnicity, region now become you balance the gender but you balance you find the right formula where the more extreme elements are either weakened or isolated, more moderate elements are centralized and that you get back on course through the configuration of leadership. The splm and spla give reform, or the engine and drivers for this process. And that they got off track. The other school of thinking is that, actually you cant build an institution, regardless of the powers of the president , whoever is president in south sudan, is still the head of the government, head of the army, head of a Political Party with no other Political Party competing and the single largest employer in the country with no private sector. No institution can be built Strong Enough to resist an office with that kind of power. They would argue this, argues generally if you put the same people in the same government asking to discuss the same issues, why would you get a different result . And in that you have a range of solutions that have been offered. One which is an interesting one is a kind of council of elders, council of the wise, a board of directors that sits over the and shepherds that. Another was a human protectorate to before and i know that was dismissed. In some ways i think if you look at the situation in south sudan, its economically dependent on sudan to its economic depend on International Donor community for billions of dollars of humanity and eight. Its military depend on uganda on for peacekeeping missions in the same country. Isnt it already a protectorate . And is this not need to be formalized and look at . Is a very dangerous neighborhood for south sudan to be kind of weak and wounded looking for help. It needs to get it needs to be cohesive, this is not a great place to be looking for help. So in many ways its probably worth those International Actors to recognize their place in this and understand the position accordingly. So the second goal would be a model of state and nation building. Again, if you think this was a much more of an acute issue, that can be addressed at the model was fine, the constitution was there, the elections were on the books, conventions were there. The thing that it was allfrom a just entered the contest. It needed to be a priority. These were good ideas. These were things that could have worked with the right configuration. And that a lot of thought has gone into it and a lot of work and, therefore, it really is about getting back on track with all this very well, years of investment in building a new state. The flipside is to say no. The whole model is wrong. It needs rethinking. The Current System in south sudan, twopart sudan, one part uganda, one part spla, splm and all written in english, american english. You are trying to comb through that and say what is the actual system in sudan on paper, in reality in time to get to that. And then need to rethink the idea. Is ethnic federalist that ethiopia has . Is this separate but equal versus integration, integration over separate . How do you deal with especially when theres fear. The confederation is one idea. Going back to the three regions and may be looking at a federal arrangement as a way to deal with new models for statebuilding. I think, briefly, that the issue of security, the issue of justice in particular, the goals of these two mechanisms has to be i think as kate and the others pointed out really has to be about the militarizing the political system, but the militarizing political competition, that there is debate, active debate. And that in addition to, you know, dealing with the conflict and moving beyond the conflict that the Security Sector, in particular the army needs to be constructed in a way that it is useless as a fighting force for a personal, ethnic, Political Party agenda. So integrated, so professional that he should bring it in it falls apart when he tried to bring in to engage the. Thats the kind of army that south sudan would need. On the issue of justice and accountability, it has to satisfy the south sudanese. Thats the measure. Whether they will or wont, and until justice can replace revenged, and that justice, will not be able to demilitarize the society as well. So we need to think of justice very much functionally in this entry is not just security and justice, not just moving beyond taking account of what happened, not just punitive but restrictive and helping this transition. And focusing not on the long game at the short which is getting to the transition. And the last goal that im going to bring forward is the issue of the budget. I think people would say that the laws are there. Its being developed, that the Natural Resources are theres plenty of Natural Resources that can be developed and paid for moving for the others are saying no, we should look at a trusteeship, that the land might belong to the people but until the government belongs to the people it needs to sit in a trusteeship. The government belongs to the people when the transition is over. Its a different conversation, s a bigger conversation. And i think itll help get closer to the, closer to what the solution is. Next i just want to focus on the economy a little bit more. I think it was raised, 75 last year of budget went to salaries. So, and 78 of that 75 went to military salaries. So besides taking, you know, as someone said, its maybe 5 of the entire population is on a direct income from the government, besides removing hem from the work force, young people from the work force, putting them in productive security roles, it does not build a country. What it does do is prevents you from pulling that money out and putting it into development because you have this dilemma. If you take the money away from the several hundred thousand people in uniform, young people, with arms and one skill, and you leave them on the street, you will never get to development. They cant afford peace, south sudan, at this point. The second is there are two economies, and they do not link up. Theres the economy of the state and the economy of the people. The subsis tense economy that most people depend on and its based on selling off the Natural Resources. But if the government chooses to sell not the fish, but the river, it will undermine the building of an economy. It will block the communities from coming in and emerging as a private sector. So the how you develop this, how you find the money will either support or undermine your future. The other constraint is simply fear. Simply fear. This idea that youre going to bring the towns to the people, right now people are terrified of the towns. So that whole model of development has to be rethought. And my last point in terms of constraints is this issue of comprehensiveness or selectiveness. If you cant do a comprehensive reconciliation, a comprehensive justice program, a comprehensive aid program and development program, youre better off not doing it. Its about whoevers left out will be left out of the nation and the state. They will have the grievances for selfdetermination that will drive them. So selective implementation of any of these processes, those who are out will be out at this point. So unless youre doing the whole thing, unless its capable of being inclusive comprehensively, the exclusion is divisive. And so just to kind of wrap up the, on to the benchmarks for success, i think most likely in the way the mediation efforts tend to be theres probably going to be a combination where, you know, those who look at the more acute model that i was talking about will be handed, and then everybody will look for transformative opportunities within the agreement thats laid out. But that the what was a transitional constitutioning will become the interim arrangements if they follow the cpa model. But ultimately what youre going to get is a matrix with a timeline laid out for everybody to look at. And what im going to argue is the issue is not really to invest in those activities, but invest in the conditions and environment for those activities to be transformational. So how do you move what is an elite, closeddoor, slightly exclusive system to one that is genuinely inclusive . Breadth, depth, quality. How do you change anger and fear into something more like healing and trust, confidence building and, essentially, confidence building in the government . How do you build responsiveness not of the International Community, but between the government and its people . How do you build a contract whether through the how do you build that contract, through the constitution, through taxing the people . Right now, i made this point before, but because this is a disconnect, the success of the government budget rises and falls has nothing to do with success of the people. Its a very different economy. So there isnt that relationship, that fundamental contract that if the people respect doing well, the government was not doing well with them. That delink is a thats the contract is broken. You listen to who gives you the check, and the check is not coming from the people. So how do you replace things like rumors, confusion and misinformation . With an informed and a demanding public. How do you replace revenge with justice, and how do you place political conflict, violent conflict with debate . I think for the International Community and i would agree with the list of priorities laid out for everybody. Yes, we have to look at people, protection of Natural Resources, national healing, support public engagement. This third voice, im not pretending its some moderate, constructive voice. It is just as diverse as the Political Parties there. But the idea of looking at constructive third, you know, public voices into the process whatever they are, hopefully constructive, and helping them become, ultimately, a third force is a key area that the International Community should look at, and i think the special envoy raised this early on. And the constitution is a clear, is a clear process. And looking at it from south africa or kenya and other places, it is a nationbuilding process. It is a process in which if everybody gets to participate, then they will own that contract. And i think the key threshold moments or benchmark moments in a constitutional process is when the population demands to be heard, largely achieved through civillic education, and civic education, and when the population who has been heard demands that their voice is represented in the structures, institutions and, ultimately, the constitution thats there. So those are the two threshold moments for the constitution, that it is a demand of the people. I just want to say to the International Community, this is our exit strategy. This transitional arrangement is our exit strategy. This is where south sudan is not stuck on the dependent si that its got itself into, especially through this conflict. So thank you very much. And 20 minutes, look at that. Okay. [laughter] thank you, jason. You gave us a whirlwind of ideas and analysis there, very rich which well certainly come back to. Just highlighting some of the key points that youve made that i think help frame our discussion about where were going, you talked about the problem of the monopolization of power and how it isnt just a matter of political power, but economic power. And so moving forward to get into a more stable place, there needs to be some diffusion of power, that there needs to be some checks and balances so that there is more a sense of ownership and political participation. And were going to see that process. You talked about the importance of demilitarizing government and depoliticizing the military since that constitutes such a huge element of the National Budget currently and in terms of national employment. And closely related to that, you talked about there being an economy of state and an economy of the people. And that the two arent necessarily connected. And that for there to be stability, there needs to be a stronger economy. It needs to be broader. There needs to be a stronger private sector that isnt dependent on the state and on ties to the state. You talked about the process of development and not just the content of development and that whats ultimately more important for stability is making sure that that process is inclusive lest people feel theyre excluded and feel grievances that they need to rectify in other ways. Closely related to that, you talked about justice, Transitional Justice and that this justice has to be relevant and meaningful for south sudanese. Its not international justice. And you talked about restorative justice, not just retributive justice or punitive justice. And i think thats an important goal that we can focus on. And then lastly, you talked about needing, for there needing to be a voice for Civil Society. To enable this dialogue and exchange. And this voice isnt going to be a unified voice. It isnt going the speak necessarily in a clear, coherent manner, but thatst still important that its still important that voice have room to maneuver and to have itself heard as part of this process of participation and healing that needs to take place and in terms of building the new institutions that are needed for a stronger, more legitimate south sudan. Okay. So thank you, panelists. Youve done what ive asked you in terms of throwing things out about what we need to be focused on here in the next six months to two years, the medium term, what are the priorities for stability. Youve given us a lot to think about. Im going to open it up now to the audience for brief questions and comments, and i want to give, first, an opportunity to ambassador koch if you would like to respond and give your own assessment about where south sudan needs to go. One logistical detail, when you need to speak, hit your button and when youre done, turn it off so we dont mix up the audio here. Thank you very much, joe. And i would like to thank the african sector for organizing this wonderful discussion about future of south sudan. I have a few comments to make, one on the crisis of the conflict, and a number of causes have been put forward. I dont disagree with all, but i disagree with one; that political space was limited to some of the leaders in the sblm. I think all the actors following the conclusion of the agreement have had very high political [inaudible] allotted to them. The government of southern sudan then included all the Political Parties in its governance in south sudan. Many [inaudible] today who feel they have been excluded or their political space has been very much reduced were very much in charge of running the show, implementation of the comprehensive agreement, organization of the elections and of the referendum. Overseeing economic development. So by and large, i would tend to think thats it is not fair to assume that space was reduced for those who are in opposition today. Yes, unfortunately, the result of the violence has led to a lot of costs in lives and materials for the people of south sudan, and it is unfortunate. We are determined to find an end point, and this is what has come through the conclusion of the cease fire. We think the way forward now is an inclusive dialogue, and that inclusive dialogue did not begin after the violence. Authorities have been in dialogue with other opposing groups. Many of you may recall that splm for Democratic Change was in opposition for a very long time after the former minister of Foreign Affairs contested against the president. And once e lost, he decided to get into exile and not come even for the declaration of independence. But we were able recently to find a solution and agree. So this was creating political space for everybody. The government of south sudan today has deterred authority, the minister for cabinet affairs, from a very small Political Party, south Sudan Democratic forum. And many other Political Forces in the country even without representation in the parliament are represented in government. I think this is what i would call political space. Recently the choice leaders led the reconciliation led process with one of the strongest fighters. And they have reached an agreement. So the desire for inclusion and our determination to reach out has been very well expressed. We want to continue with that through the upcoming dialogue in addis ababa by inviting political leaders including david and other Political Parties, by inviting leaders, womens groups, youth and already stakeholders to participate. This has been clearly stated thurm of times number of times. So that is one way forward. We hope through mechanism that will be creating conditions of confidence building and Cooperation Amongst the south sudanese people to have stability and readiness for the next phase of elections. We hope until then the only method to create open space and democratic processes be given content is through elections. Whether we need to wait for making a census so as to determine the populations and divide constituencies based on [inaudible] to us, its immaterial for now. Because if we do that, we are going to delay the elections, and some of the people who are competing for the top positions would feel that it is a deliberate method. So it is going to be a doubleedged sword. We do not want to they the elections. We want to we do not want to delay the elections. We want to go ahead and, hopefully, when things change for the better in the near future, we hope we can now review whatever would be that assembly and maybe a census asemiby and hold fresh Elections Assembly and hold fresh elections. Yes, the spla, i agree with most of the analysis that the spla is not today as a National Institution. It doesnt represent all the members of our society. But it was not built on bad faith. It was built correctly to push us forward and get to stability, have elections, have the retch dumb without interruption referendum without interruption. It has backfired. So many people are cognizant about the need now to whether they are leaders or whether they are Civil Society members, there is need to review the composition of the splm in parity and to be representative of our national composition. But we are grateful for what they do. We have to thank them and our friends who have come from the region who did not come on their own. We have been cooperating for a very long time with them in the fight against the are lra, and it is a sovereign decision of south sudan. Its not going to complicate anybody or anything to have friends invited and mandated by the igad, by the African Union. By the igad in particular. To be the south sudan. So the requests for them to leave from either institutions might not be the best way. I think it would be better to cooperate with south sudan by having a direct talk with authorities. And should the need for their presence have come to an end, then definitely south sudan will reconsider. Yes, this is need for accountability as part of whatever is going to be agreed. We need to have complete accountability. By accountability, im not being particular about one group. Whoever has committed a crime against an individual, against a Community Must be taken to justice. I know there are seven offices who have been identified to have used excessive power against some civilians, and they are under investigation, and the results will be publicized very soon. The Constitutional Review is an absolute necessity. It has been underway. Sometimes blocked by the internal quibbles, but it is a mess way forward necessary way forward. And there are so many ways of making permanent constitution. But the current review process should be carried forward to the end. Power sharing in the, during the transitional period is a possibility. It depends how we work it out. Weve always been accommodative of ourselves. This is not the first time we are quarreling. But in our house, we quarrel. But again, we sit down to talk, to eat together and to laugh. And so i believe that current violation is going to create an opportunity for the current violence is going to create an opportunity for us to rethink our relations, our policies, our vision for south sudan and finding our space within the International Community. But not as a protectorate. Thank you. Okay, thank you, ambassador khoc. Thank you for being here again, and thank you for your candor in responding to these observations and comments. Your observation about the spla, need for reform and greater inclusiveness. You highlight many of the same themes that were brought out here on the panel about the need for political space and inclusiveness and political inclusiveness and some of the efforts made by the government to involve other parties. You talk about the need for more accountability and mechanisms more power sharing and realizing that where youre at now isnt enough for where you hope to go. So we appreciate that. I think that very much consistent with what we are hoping to do with this discussion today and lay out some of these issues, what are the priorities. And youve given us some of what you see as the priorities, and now what do we need to do to make these a reality Going Forward here in the interim, mediumterm trajectory. So i now will open it up to the general audience, and just in terms of timing well, since weve gone a little bit late, were going to take this til 11 15 and give folks a chance to get a few more questions in and facilitate more of the exchange. So were going to start way back in the corner over here. Please speak into a microphone and identify yourself, then keep your comment or question brief. Well take three questions. Thank you very much. My name [inaudible] member of the [inaudible] assembly in south sudan. They call me the [inaudible] because im the youngest. Im so pleased to be here. I just came from addis, and im also part of the [inaudible] taking place in addis. Also one of the survivors who came from juba, almost killed. Escaped the [inaudible] my house was destroyed by the militia, and my brother was killed and his wife. But after all, im not bitter because im a leader of this nation. I will be ready to forgive and forget whatever happen, and i will be ready also to contribute to the building of the nation of this cup. Of in this country. I will be very specific, and i will directly to the point. First of all, i will talk about the root cause of the problem. Number one, south sudan, i have a big problem. We have not died as a tribe and measure as one mission. Were still a tribe. Our leader can did not do much, including myself, to fight this disease of tribalism. And our government system [inaudible] in the Public Services is done on tribal basis. You find one institution being dominated by one tribe from the gatekeeper up to the minister. And sometimes you find people speaking this their own language. Be if you come to the institution, you will hard to get into the system because people are using their own language instead of national language. So tribalism is one thing that is killing our people today. We have also a weak system of the government where theres no accountability, and can there is no and there is no transparency. And in the parliament we have a lot of difficultyies. And one thing that almost led me to be killed is because of the way i talk in parliament. I used to be vocal about corruption and also contribute a lot reacting some of the appointed members by the president when we thought they were not fit for the position. And even our diplomatic mission, we have 80 ambassadors are from one tribe. Our army is set up on a tribal basis. If you go to the army, all the [inaudible] they are from one tribe, artillery, those who are going [inaudible] outside world, they are one tribe. This is the root cause of the problem. And we will not be shy to tell the truth, because we know that when we tell the truth is when we are come out with a real solution to the problem. When the fighting start, i was in juba on the 15th. It started because nobody was knowing that is going to happen because it was not a coup, actually. It was something publy candidated maybe for the president to kill [inaudible] or maybe hurt them and go to election without them [inaudible] give them amnesty, and they will be not active in the policy. I have sir, if you could then wrap up your point about tribalism. Okay. And then we have also a weak system of judicial system is very weak. Is also based on tribal, and [inaudible] it would remove of the elected governor and remove some of the [inaudible] if this all this. And the way forward in that we are now not a country. We dont have an army. Thats why we see [inaudible] intervening. Theres no army, and theres no government system. The only way we have [inaudible] interim period is constitution and election. And in interim period, we should get a neutral person to lead for one year or two years until we go for election. I think that will be the only way. Because if we keep putting people together with that mess because now about 17,000 people died in juba. And this [inaudible] because of the militiamen, 15,000 more were trained by [inaudible] when they came, they go off looking for people. So these are the things we will forgive, and we would like to tell the International Community that the only way for our president to step aside [inaudible] we vote for interim period, two years, three years, write a constitution [inaudible] to president. We vote for election. Thank you very much. Okay, thank you very much. We appreciate your personal sharing, and i appreciate you moving us forward thinking about what has to happen here in this mediumterm future. To the extent possible, id like to avoid focusing on whats happened in the past now and really use the time we have to look about where things need to go and focus on some of the priorities. There are a lot of hands, well go here and then hi. Hi, im Ellen Rattner [inaudible] id like to ask the following how do you get aid to the people . If you go the markets, usi r aids usaids materials, theyre not getting to the people. How do you get the aid to the people right now . Okay, thank you very much. For the clarity. Go ahead. Im interested in the panelists thoughts on you remind us who you are . Sorry, yes. Lauren [inaudible] with the Congressional Research service. Interested in the panelists thoughts on the role of igad and the mediation Going Forward. Ambassador booth, you mentioned how critical theyve been to the process so far and, obviously, in terms of timeliness and pressure, they were very instrumental. But Going Forward in terms of focusing on an inclusive political dialogue, the role that hay played in the cpa talks, that was an exclusive rather than inclusive process. And i guess, you know, there are some questions about the role of uganda and its military operations in south sudan right now on behalf of the south sudan government. Kiir is, obviously, a sitting head of state and head of state of the igad administration. Ethiopia, you began da uganda, these are oneparty states. So in the interest of expanding the dialogue beyond the splm, are they necessarily the most appropriate body to lead the effort Going Forward . Okay. Thank you. And if you could remember to turn off your microphone when youre done, we wont pick up the background noise. Well take one more question. Ambassador bellamy, please. Hi, im mark bellamy, a former director of the Africa Center. My question is sort of parallel to laurens. And this is really a question for any or all of the panelists. How great is the risk, in your view, that if we go through a protracted process of trying to implement a cease fire and separate the parties and so forth that the mediators, the region, the International Community will decide thats as far as we can go . You know, there is a very necessary statebuilding agenda out there if south sudan is to get off of this trajectory, but really as far as we can go is to get back to the status quo ante, and is that a risk . And if so, what do we need to do to mitt gate it . Mitigate it . Okay, thank you. So weve got a number of questions, varying issues on the table. Ill give the panel a chance to respond, pick up which dimensions of this youd like to, and if you dont have anything to add, thats fine, well just go to another round. So, ambassador booth, would you like to lead us off . Okay, met me start just briefly let me start just briefly, and i think kate with her experience can answer the question directly more of how do you get aid to the people. But one of the key things is getting aid to those who are the most vulnerable, to tend to be at this point those that are internally displaced. And many of them are in unmiss camps at this point, and so the World Food Program is taking the lead on trying to move food and nonfood items to support them. But thats just one component of it. To answer the question about igad mediation Going Forward, i read a quote out of the igad communique, and what it made very clear in the instructions to the mediators was that they need to engage in a comprehensive, inclusive process. So while, yes, many igad members have dominant party systems, that doesnt mean that thats what theyre trying to impose on south sudan. They recognize that south sudan needs to have in order to achieve stability has to have of a broader based consultation. So the first approach on this is really for the mediators themselves to collect ideas and input from a broad base of south Sudanese Society in order to try to develop a framework to propose to the south sudanese themselves for moving forward on the political dialogue to address the underlying causes of this conflict. And, mark, this in terms in terms of are we going to stop at the cessation of hostilities, absolutely not. While work is going on trying to get the monitoring and Verification Mechanism up and running and working effectively and igad Member States and the International Community will need to back up the reporting of that mechanism in order to put pressure on the parties to comply with the coh, theres already the process. In fact, therell be a meeting thats been called for the 10th of february in addis to try to bring the parties back together to Start Talking about this framework for the inclusive political talks that will address at least the Governance Party structures Going Forward. And there are many other ideas that are out there as well that may be pursued from reconciliation to Security Sector reform to economic issues. So clearly, there is a broad, i think, International Backing for the igad mediation to continue to pursue this effort and igad heads of state have indicated their commitment to sticking with this. Okay. On the, on the access to humanitarian aid, the logistical challenges aside or negotiations of excess aside, i think what is happening already the way that the [inaudible] are responding and the narrative of how the country got here are all, well, too reminiscent of the period between 1991 and 2005 when ols was Operation Lifeline sudan was active. And i think it relates to the ambassadors question as well, that perhaps the negotiation of aid and access the aid we must be very, very watchful of it so that it does not become another war front between the parties, so that it doesnt become so intrinsically linked to conflictment because that is how you get the conflict to be protracted, when aid itself becomes linked to conflict. Already we see that different, the government and the op to decision might opposition might entrench themselves in their own position where they would want independent access to aid, and it will once again let south sudanese leaders off the hook from their responsibility for welfare of their people. Because the International Community will be feeding their people so they can just go on fighting their own war. I think we have to be extremely careful about how aid can be played into the conflict. And if ols is what we are looking at all over again, tragically i think were looking at a very protracted situation in south sudan. I would just echo joks comments. I cant speak for current u. S. Government assistance, certainly, and i havent been in south sudan since the crisis broke out, you know, to see firsthand, but i have to say i find watching from a distance here in the United States, you know, the discussion on delivery of humanitarian assistance and the problems, you know, never mind the logistical challenges, but the problems with the parties, with the government and the opposition, you know, in terms of interference and theft of humanitarian commodities is deeply disturbing. And i, too, feel that going back to the Operation Lifeline sudan type scenario which was an overall negotiated access mechanism where each side got to turn on and off access to the area that they controlled and to determine when and how vulnerable populations could be reached would be disastrous. And i think if i were sitting in a seat at usaid or another donor, we would be having a very difficult can, tough conversation about how that was going to play out and what the role of the government is. This is a very different situation than it was before. The government is responsible for its people, and the fact that we have over 3. 7 million in need of emergency Food Assistance just between now and the next rainy season when that map that you can see posted here and to the side, a vast amount of the countryside will be inaccessible. You will not be able to reach populations. You know, with any kind of assistance. To be stolen, distributed or otherwise. And so time is of the essence. I hear over and over again that spla is a professional army. Many quotes coming out from the government, from juba and from key ministers there if it were a professional army, there would not be theft of humanitarian commodities, period. So its a very serious question, and its one that has to be addressed front on because it cannot feed a logic of we can just never mind going back to the status quo ante of december 14th, were going all the way back to well before the Peace Agreement was even, you know, conceived of as a process in terms of negotiations and back to the 90s in terms of how humanitarian aid operated in south sudan. So i think its very, very disturbing, its a very troubling situation. Its one that we should be able to work with the government as partners in getting through the interim period and the referendum and independence thus far. We shouldnt be in this kind of situation and dialogue over delivery of humanitarian assistance for certain. And i would also just maybe offer a comment to laurens question about the igad mediation Going Forward and an inclusive process, and i think that its vital from the outset that the next phase of talks be set up not just as, you know, as the two opposing sides and the handful of delegates representing them in addis and then representatives sort of perched around them observing and trying to sway positions on the margins of the talks in addis, but there be direct linkages and consultations for starters in south sudan that inform how the mediators frame the talk and how they set up the process Going Forward. You know, i think most critically the government of south sudan must accept that there needs to be a political transition and that it has to be broader than the government and determining how to, you know, reconcile within the splm and with those in opposition currently. You know, certainly the detain knees that are detainees that are under much discussion and attention, you know, are part of that dialogue, but by no means sufficient for an inclusive process Going Forward. You know, and it really needs to be set up fundamentally different than the cpa negotiations which took place to get us to this point. Just i think the two imperatives, ending the violence and delivering humanitarian assistance, have really have or threatened to to shape the playing field. A lot of thought has gone in how to transition from cessation of hostilities into political talks about incluessivity and creating mechanisms to monitor on grounds by the community this cessation of hostilities. The same kind of thinking needs go into the aid effort, getting the aid to people and the people to the aid. Recognizing, as kate and jok both pointed out, ols, you know, the longest Emergency Operation in the history of the United Nations is not really the model youre going for to avoid the risk that you set of creating a permanent, unstable environment. I think we need to look at both of those to avoid this risk that what were going to do is create a polarized south sudan and entrench it further. Just a simple question as i pointed out in my presentation of asking, you know, of setting up the aid architecture. Who gives permission to go, whos your counterpart that guarantees the security, who gives you, whos going the help you distribute that food all the way down and hand it to the village is in itself establishing a political system, is itself establishing an aid patronage network. That is very hard to break. And if we recognize that the conflict is, can be ultimately unwinnable, it becomes asymmetric, i. E, the opposition side making areas ungovernable as opposed to governing them, then this thing will go, and this aid will perpetuate in the absence of any real political transition. Thank you. Okay. Lets take another round of of questions and comments. Go here first. Yes, you, sir. Richard lobin from the Naval War College and sudan studies association. And i really appreciate the optimistic data that has been presented, the path to stability as is the title. But i think youre struggling to get the Glass Half Full when, in fact, it really is at least more than half empty. And it seems like the main agenda should be management of crisis and conflict. Im inclined to look at that when i see the map that