In 2015, as a civil war raged in South Sudan, the United Nations Security Council imposed the first set of sanctions on the country, including asset freezes and travel bans on various senior officials. Three years later, after a ceasefire agreement was repeatedly violated, the UNSC gathered enough votes to impose a full arms embargo. A fragile peace eventually settled in, but the embargo remained in place and was extended annually.
The review of the embargo is approaching on May 29, and there is pressure from African members of the UNSC, Sierra Leone, Somalia, and Algeria, to lift it. On March 18, the African Union Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) publicly called for an end to this measure.
However, lifting the embargo on South Sudan at this time would be a mistake. Violence has returned to plague the country, killing at least 180 people between March and mid-April amid deepening divisions between President Salva Kiir and First Vice President Riek Machar, who is currently under house arrest.
Allowing more weapons into the country would only escalate the dire situation. This would not benefit neighboring countries or the African Union as a whole.
Under the AU’s development plan, Agenda 2063, the continent has set an ambitious goal of “Silencing the Guns” by 2020, which has since been extended to 2030. With this goal, the AU aims to “end all wars and violent conflicts and promote dialogue-based mechanisms for conflict prevention and resolution.”
Yet, the AUPSC’s call to lift the embargo on South Sudan contradicts these goals. The justification for this stance is that unrestricted access to more weapons can help unify government and opposition forces, as well as reform the security sector.
However, this logic overlooks the growing fractures in South Sudan amid renewed tensions between Kiir and Machar. Increasing the number of guns in the hands of warring parties involved in serious human rights violations and crimes under international law would only exacerbate the situation.
South Sudan’s security and defense forces have attacked the very people they are meant to protect: civilians. The South Sudanese army, National Security Service, and armed opposition forces have been implicated in war crimes and human rights violations for well over a decade, according to the AU’s Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan and the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan.
Indeed, around the time the AUPSC called for the lifting of the arms embargo, South Sudan’s government reportedly used improvised incendiary weapons in aerial attacks, killing at least 58 people and injuring others, including children.
Indeed, the existence of the arms embargo is not enough; its enforcement is crucial. That enforcement is already faltering, as in early March, Uganda sent troops and military equipment to South Sudan without providing prior notification or receiving special exemption from the UNSC Sanctions Committee. This is a clear violation of the embargo.
South Sudan’s Mi-24 helicopters also seem to be operational, despite reports that the government’s fleet has been non-functional and grounded since the arms embargo was imposed in 2018. This suggests spare parts have been acquired in violation of the embargo.
On May 4, Doctors Without Borders, known by its French initials MSF, reported that two helicopter gunships had bombed its medical facility in Old Fangak the day before and fired at the town, killing seven and injuring 20 others. Deliberate attacks on a medical facility carrying out its humanitarian function violate international humanitarian law and would constitute a war crime. This is yet another indication of why the UNSC must renew the arms embargo and strengthen its enforcement.
If properly implemented and enforced, a renewed UNSC arms embargo would not hinder security sector reform. Instead, it would prevent the disorderly and destabilizing accumulation of arms in South Sudan, which is fueling the current conflict and contributing to violations against civilians.
If the AU is serious about silencing the guns, it should support strict controls prohibiting arms transfers to South Sudan, and the African states in the UNSC should vote to renew the arms embargo.
