‘They came for us, to take our shelters and kill us’: how violence returned to a shattered South Sudan

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Escalating Violence in South Sudan Raises Fears of Civil War Resurgence"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 6.3
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

On the night of March 24, 2023, an airstrike carried out by the South Sudanese government illuminated the skies over Juba, targeting an opposition base in Wunaliet, just 15 kilometers from the capital. This military action marked a significant escalation in ongoing clashes between President Salva Kiir's forces and opposition groups, particularly in the northeastern state of Upper Nile, where tensions have surged. Nicholas Haysom, the head of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (Unmiss), had recently warned that the country was on the brink of a return to civil war. The situation deteriorated further when the White Army, a militia aligned with opposition leader Riek Machar, attacked a government base in Nasir, leading to the death of the base commander and igniting a series of retaliatory actions by the government. These actions included the arrest of opposition figures and an aerial bombardment campaign that reportedly resulted in civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure, raising alarms from human rights organizations regarding the use of incendiary weapons against non-combatants.

The South Sudanese government responded to the escalating violence by seeking military assistance from the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF), a move that Machar condemned as a breach of the peace treaty established in 2018, which aimed to end years of conflict. Despite government assurances of commitment to the peace process, the ongoing violence and the arrest of key opposition leaders have led to widespread fear among the civilian population. Many, like John, a displaced person, have experienced direct threats to their safety and have fled their homes due to military actions. Humanitarian agencies reported a significant increase in the number of people seeking refuge in internally displaced persons (IDP) camps as violence escalated. The slow progress in implementing the peace agreement and the postponement of elections originally set for December 2022 have left the South Sudanese populace in a state of uncertainty and despair, with calls for increased protection and humanitarian aid becoming increasingly urgent. As the situation continues to evolve, the prospects for peace remain bleak, leaving many to wonder about the future of their country amidst unending violence and political instability.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article highlights the recent resurgence of violence in South Sudan, focusing on an airstrike carried out by the government amid escalating tensions between opposing forces. It presents a grim picture of the deteriorating political and security situation in the country, emphasizing the potential for a return to civil war.

Underlying Intentions of the Article

This report aims to draw attention to the ongoing violence and instability in South Sudan. By documenting specific events, such as the airstrike and the actions of the White Army, the article seeks to convey the severity of the situation and the human cost of the conflict. It may also aim to pressure international bodies and neighboring countries to take action or reconsider their involvement in South Sudan.

Public Perception and Narrative

The narrative constructed in the article is one of urgency and crisis. By detailing the government's military actions and the suffering inflicted upon civilians, the piece fosters a sense of empathy and concern among readers. It positions the South Sudanese government as a perpetrator of violence, potentially influencing public opinion against the ruling regime and encouraging calls for intervention or support for opposition forces.

Information Omission

While the article provides a vivid account of recent events, it may obscure other facets of the conflict, such as the historical grievances, economic factors, or the roles of various international actors. By focusing primarily on military actions and humanitarian consequences, the article could inadvertently simplify a complex situation, leading readers to form opinions based solely on the information presented.

Manipulative Elements

The article uses emotionally charged language when describing the airstrike and its impact on civilians, which could evoke strong reactions from readers. The choice of words like "horrifically burned" and "destroyed civilian infrastructure" serves to amplify the tragedy of the situation. Such language can manipulate public sentiment and potentially sway opinions in favor of interventionist policies without presenting a balanced view.

Comparative Analysis with Other Reports

When compared to other reports on South Sudan, this article aligns with a broader narrative of governmental failure and humanitarian crisis. Similar articles may emphasize the need for international intervention, creating a collective urgency in media coverage. This consistency in reporting may indicate a shared understanding of the situation among various news outlets, reinforcing the notion that South Sudan is in dire need of aid and intervention.

Implications for Society and Politics

The article could significantly impact public perception and political discourse surrounding South Sudan. It may foster international scrutiny of the government's actions, potentially leading to increased diplomatic pressure or sanctions. Domestically, it could galvanize opposition groups and mobilize civil society organizations to advocate for change.

Target Audiences

The article likely resonates with humanitarian organizations, activists, and individuals concerned about human rights issues. It seeks to engage readers who are sympathetic to the plight of civilians in conflict zones and who might advocate for greater international involvement in South Sudan.

Impact on Global Markets

This news could have implications for international investors and aid organizations, particularly those with interests in conflict resolution or humanitarian assistance in South Sudan. Companies involved in resource extraction or development projects may need to reassess their risk in light of the escalating violence.

Geopolitical Context

The situation in South Sudan is relevant in the context of regional stability, especially given its location near Ethiopia and its historical ties to various militia groups. Given the current geopolitical landscape, the article underscores the importance of monitoring conflict zones, as they can have ripple effects on global security and economic stability.

Artificial Intelligence Usage

While it is challenging to ascertain the exact use of AI in the creation of this article, it is plausible that AI tools were employed in the data analysis or content generation process. AI models could have influenced the narrative by highlighting key facts and structuring the content to maintain engagement. If AI was used, it might have streamlined the reporting process, but the emotional tone and urgent language suggest a human touch in crafting the narrative.

The reliability of the article hinges on its sources and the context it presents. While it appears to rely on credible organizations like Human Rights Watch and statements from UN officials, the potential for bias in framing the narrative and the omission of broader context must be considered. Thus, while the article is grounded in real events, it selectively emphasizes certain aspects, which may affect its overall trustworthiness and the perspectives it encourages.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Night had already fallen on Juba, the capital ofSouth Sudan, at about 7pm on 24 March, when an orange glow lit up the sky. It didn’t take long before news spread that the government had carried out an airstrike. For weeks, clashes had taken place in remote parts of the country between the army of the president, Salva Kiir, and opposition forces, but never that close to the capital. The target – an opposition base in Wunaliet, 15km west of the city – was consumed in flames.

Just hours before the airstrike, Nicholas Haysom, the head of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (Unmiss), had warned that the political and security situation in the country had deteriorated. “We are left with no other conclusion but to assess that South Sudan is teetering on the edge of a relapse into civil war,” he told a press briefing.

Tensions have been particularly high in the north-eastern state of Upper Nile. On 4 March, the White Army, a youth militia from the Nuer ethnic group loosely associated with the movement of the opposition leader and first vice-president, Riek Machar, overran a government army base in the town of Nasir, near the Ethiopian border. The base commander, general David Majur Dak,was killedthree days later during an evacuation attempt by the UN, alongside a UN worker and dozens of soldiers.

The government responded by arresting dozens of opposition figures in Juba, including the minister of petroleum, Puot Kang Chol. They were accused of being “in conflict with the law” by the government spokesperson Michael Makuei Lueth, who blamed them for inciting those in Nasir.

An aerial bombardment campaign was also launched in Upper Nile, involving the “use of improvised air-dropped incendiary weapons [that] killed and horrifically burned dozens of people, including children, and destroyed civilian infrastructure”, according toHuman Rights Watch.

To counter rising instability, the South Sudanese government asked the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF) for help, based on a pre-existing military cooperation agreement. But Machardenounced the UPDF deploymentas a violation of the 2018 arms embargo and the peace treaty, which ended five years of fighting that killed about 400,000 people.

On 23 March, he said in a letter to the UN that the Ugandan intervention may lead to the collapse of the agreement. It was the last time Machar communicated publicly. Three days later, he was placed under house arrest.

Amnesty International has alsodecried the involvement of Ugandan soldiersand called on the UN security council to renew the arms embargo when it expires at the end of this month.

The government has repeatedly emphasised its commitment to the peace process. But calls for an end to the violence and Machar’s release have been ignored, and the bombardment of opposition strongholds has continued in several parts of the country.

A Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) hospital in the town of Old Fangak, a safe haven for thousands of flood-displaced Nuer people in northern Jonglei state, was bombed on 3 May. Seven died and many were wounded in an attack that MSF denounced as a “deliberate bombing” of the facility.

Progress since the 2018 peace agreement has been slow. As part of the deal, and under pressure from the international community, Kiir agreed to share power with Machar, his longtime opponent. A unity government was formed in 2020, whose task was to unify the rival armed forces, reform the country and organise its first elections since independence in 2011.

But an election initially envisioned for December 2022 has been postponed twice, and is now scheduled for December 2026.

Seeing the peace process in tatters is particularly daunting for those who depend on it to rebuild their lives.

John (not his real name), 55, lived in an overcrowded camp for internally displaced people (IDP) next to the Unmiss base on the outskirts of Juba for 11 years. Like tens of thousands of Nuer, he had run to the UN for protection at the beginning of the civil war in December 2013 (the camp was under UN peacekeepers’ protection until 2020).

But in October last year, he left “because there are no humanitarian services and no food here”, and moved into a friend’s mud house in nearby Khor Ramla. There, he was trying to survive by working in agriculture and artisanal gold mining. When clashes erupted at several nearby military camps after 24 March, John says he became a target.

“After the army bombed Wunaliet, they attacked the opposition at other training centres and dispersed the soldiers [loyal to Riek Machar]” he says. “Then they came for us, the Nuer staying in Khor Ramla, to take our shelters, and to kill us.” When the government soldiers started shooting, he escaped, barefoot, at night. More than a month later, injuries on his feet have still not healed. He says one of his colleagues was killed.

John returned to the camp next to Unmiss on 28 March. According to humanitarian agencies,4,000 peoplemoved to IDP camps in March, “as a precaution while tensions and fears of intercommunal violence are high”. But he does not feel safe. Five young men have been shot dead near the camp since the Nasir crisis, according to multiple sources, but “the families do not want to open cases because they are afraid”, John says.

Sign up toGlobal Dispatch

Get a different world view with a roundup of the best news, features and pictures, curated by our global development team

after newsletter promotion

Several others have disappeared. John gives the names of a woman who went to collect firewood and never came back, and of a man who went to his usual place to make charcoal, but never returned. “We live in fear, we can’t go out for our subsistence, and we have no idea what will happen next,” he says. “What we need is protection from the peacekeepers until every chapter of the peace agreement is implemented.”

Priyanka Chowdhury, a spokesperson for Unmiss, says: “We have strengthened our countrywide protection efforts, including intensifying patrols and engagement with community leaders at internal displacement sites.” She emphasises, however, that “the government of South Sudan is primarily responsible for protecting civilians”.

On 7 March, when Kiir announced the death of Dak, the base commander in Nasir, he asked citizens “not to take the law into their hands” and repeated his promise: “I will never take this country back to war.” He also regretted that a “normal routine with the armed forces became politicised”, referring to the rotation of military personnel in Nasir, which had triggered local hostility.

Questions have been raised over why the government didn’t deploy the Necessary Unified Forces (NUF), the national army envisioned by the peace agreement, to quell tensions in the north. The government blamed the arms embargo, saying the NUF could not be deployed to conflict areas without proper weapons.

In the meantime, South Sudan’s tired and traumatised population is left wondering “who will bring peace”, says Jackline Nasiwa, executive director of the Centre for Inclusive Governance, Peace and Justice.

“The people of South Sudan cannot heal in an environment of unending violence and political uncertainty,” Nasiwatold the UN security councilon 16 April. Despite its flaws, she believes the 2018 peace agreement remains “the only viable option for the people of South Sudan to transition to democracy”, stressing that “the immediate needs on the ground are for civilian protection and unobstructed aid delivery”.

On 8 April, students are waiting for the start of classes at a newly built secondary school next to Gorom refugee camp, 20km to the south-west of Juba. Mawichnyun Gatduong, 19, from the northern city of Bentiu, sits in the bright white classroom with a mix of students from nearby villages and Sudanese refugees staying in the camp.

“We have all heard the gunshots, and we didn’t come to school for several days,” Gatduong says, referring to fighting around military camps south of Juba.

“I’m so worried about the situation because we don’t know if they will end the war or not.

“It can affect young people like us, because someone can catch you and force you to be a soldier,” he says, advising other youths “to be patient, stay in one place and not to move around apart from going to school”.

His dream is to become a doctor. “It is the only thing I am struggling for.”

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian