The Root Causes of Sudan's Civil Wars

by Douglas H. Johnson

Sudan's post-independence history has been dominated by long, recurring, and bloody civil wars. Most commentators have attributed the country's political and civil strife either to an age-old racial and ethnic divide between Arabs and Africans or to colonially constructed inequalities. In The Root Causes of Sudan's Civil Wars, Douglas H. Johnson examines historical, political, economic, and social factors to come to a more subtle understanding of the trajectory of Sudan's civil wars. Johnson focuses on the essential differences between the modern Sudan's first civil war in the 1960s, the current war, and the minor conflicts generated by and contained within the larger wars. Regional and international factors, such as humanitarian aid, oil revenue, and terrorist organizations, are cited and examined as underlying issues that have exacerbated the violence. Readers will find an immensely readable yet nuanced and well-informed handling of the history and politics of Sudan's civil wars. A well-balanced account of the numerous and complex forces involved in one of Africa's most intractable conflicts.

Genres: Africa, Sudan, History, South Sudan, Politics, Nonfiction

256 pages, Hardcover

First published December 1, 2002

About the author

Douglas H. Johnson: Formerly Assistant Director for Archives in the Regional Ministry of Culture and Information, Juba, the Sudan; author of several articles on Sudanese history.

Reviews

[Guri · Rating 4 out of 5]

Throrough, but quite a dense book. Took ages to read! Some sections have also not really been updated since the early 2000s. Still a very informative book.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you happen to have an interest in Sudan and South Sudan and their seemingly intractable problems [1], this book does a good job at pointing out those issues in grim detail.  It should be noted, though, that this book makes for pretty grim reading.  Even if the book is somewhat short, it deals with a lot of very unpleasant issues and seems aimed at an audience of Western policymakers and pressure groups.  I do not know whether or not I would be considered among the target audience of this book, but I was able to understand it and find a great deal of worthwhile information not only in the civil wars of Sudan (and there are many of them, even now), but in the way that the problems this book discusses are relevant to other situations outside of Sudan that demonstrate the root causes of other nations that have struggled to develop a unified national culture because of their political and historical problems.  This book does not indicate that Sudan's problems are likely to be resolved, or even openly acknowledged, anytime soon, which makes for some rather unhappy reflection on the fate of these unhappy countries and others like them.

This particular volume consists of eleven chapters, an epilogue, and various supplemental materials that are a bit more than 200 pages of reading.  The author begins with a discussion of the historical structure of North-South relations in Sudan (1) with a look at the traditional view of peripheral regions as a source for raw materials and slaves for export down the river to Egypt.  After this the author looks at the period of British overrule from 1899-1947 and looks at how South Sudan and its issues were frequently ignored or neglected by the British, who never developed a coherent plan on how to develop the region (2).  The author then looks at Nationalism, Independence, and the First Civil War, pointing out that given the way that nationalist fervor was limited to the North and that Sudanese national identity was seen as tied up with issues of race and religion, conflict was rapid to develop (3).  After this the author looks at the largely unsatisfactory Addis Ababa Agreement and the short period of regional government from 1972-83 (4) before looking at the beginnings of the Second Civil War from 1983-1985 (5).  A short interlude follows before the author looks at the increasing momentum towards the liberation of South Sudan from 1986-1991 (6), the SPLA split and how South Sudan's revolutionary movement survived factionalism (7) before turning to the ugliness of the Nuer Civil War after the pro-government factions of South Sudan split themselves (8).  After this the author looks at the complexity of multiple civil wars in Sudan (9), the war economy and the politics (and geopolitics) of relief (10), and the question of whether the comprehensive peace was only a temporary truce (11) before closing with an epilogue that shows how Sudan's civil wars have continued in both Sudan and South Sudan after the latter country's independence in 2011.  After this comes an annotated bibliography as well as a detailed timeline showing the chronology of Sudan's troubled history, especially post-independence.

When it comes to examining the root causes of Sudan's civil wars, there is no shortage of blame to go around.  Sudan (and to a much lesser extent South Sudan) are faulted for not having built a national identity on positive grounds or a state that served to respect the rights and freedoms of all citizens.  Patterns of exploitation of the resources of peripheral areas, land expropriation, and the failure of Sudan's elites to respect non-Arab and non-Muslim citizens and allow them and their regions to reap the benefits of Sudan's resources are pointed out over and over again.  The international community is faulted for being supine to the military governments of Khartoum and blind to the systemic patterns of exploitation and oppression by Sudan, while corruption relating to foreign aid and development is discussed as well.  Historical problems in the development of leadership among the Dinka, Nuer, and various relatively privileged groups from the Equitorial region of South Sudan are also discussed.  The author does not stint in talking about the problems of Darfur and the Nuba Mountains, where non-Arabic Muslim peoples face death, exile, and land expropriation themselves based on Khartoum's strategies, making this area a "new South."  Overall, this book makes for depressing reading and one wonders whether or not the governments of Sudan and South Sudan will ever manage to build trust and unity within their states.

[1] See, for example:

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...

[Binston Birchill · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a dense book that still maintains good readability. While by no means could I keep track of every name or acronym, there was a lot that stood out. Highly recommended if you want to understand the civil wars in Sudan.

Johnson really zeroes in on the root causes of the civil wars which are increasingly complicated as time moves forward. There are many different entities with opinions and influence both within Sudan and without; factions, governments, NGO’s, corporations. The extent to which these entities understand the conflict plays a part in the lack of a solution found.

As Johnson wrote the book there didn’t seem to be a lot of hope for a resolution (a feeling unfortunately proven correct). The version I read was the “updated second impression” 2004. It does not contain much information about the 21st century other than a few changes that 9/11 brought about.

Breaking Sudan: The Search for Peace by Jok Maduk Jok (2017) is the next book I’ll be seeking out for an updated look at Sudan.




4.8 stars

[Will · Rating 3 out of 5]

More than a focus on Sudan's Civil Wars, really this is a book about South Sudan's war of independence, and the other conflicts in Sudan (Blue Nile, Darfur, S Kordofan, etc.) are only peripherally discussed. It does provide a broad overview of the politics and conflict of the war in the south.

On a smaller note, this is the 3rd edition update, and its very clear the new edition didn't really update the old editions very much, as there are a number of very out-of-date references to events (e.g. South Sudan's potential separation, even though the third edition was published 5 years after South Sudanese independence).

[Nicholas Whyte]

"http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1263632.html?#cutid2[return][return]Johnson takes a more southern view than Collins' History of Modern Sudan , and indeed invokes anthropology (which I always appreciate) as much as political analysis to tell, essentially, much the same story. (Johnson snipes at some of Collins' earlier work from the footnotes.)[return][return]Johnson's focus is, not unreasonably, on the north-south conflict. He provides a much deeper understanding than Collins of what made the resort to war not only credible but almost inevitable - and not only between the south and the north, but within the south, in particular when John Garang's lieutenant Riek Machar struck out on his own to lead what became a largely Nuer struggle against Garang's largely Dinka forces (though as Johnson rightly points out, one should not try and categorise too rigorously). Apart from 'tribal' identities, there was also the strategic choice between Garang's ideal of a secular state in the whole of Sudan, with southern autonomy, or the option of independence for the south which Machar explicitly adopted.[return][return]Johnson finished his book before the most recent peace agreement, and although at first sight the agreement itself disproves his conclusion that conflict is deeply entrenched and self-perpetuating, in fact he highlights many of the issues which remain unresolved even now, and will need to be sorted out in the short to medium term if peace between north and south is to continue.[return][return]Johnson also points out that humanitarian aid itself becomes a factor in the perpetuation of conflict: inevitably, the deliverers of such aid must compromise with (and thus empower) certain local forces against others. [return][return]While Johnson's book is very good at getting into the mechanics of South Sudan, I thought he missed on two other important areas. First, he seems to see the Darfur (and other) problems in the north as reflections of the north-south question. It's pretty clear that there are plenty of indigenous and external factors to make Darfur unstable even if the South were not an issue (and in fairness to Johnson, his book was finished before the worst in Darfur). Second, in his introduction he claims that conflict in Sudan, as elsewhere, is caused by internal problems being escalated by external actors. It's not at all clear to me, on the evidence that he and Collins present, that external actors were a prerequisite for the outbreak of conflict. It is, however, clear that external actors have played a crucial role in ending it - the 1972 autonomy deal would not have happened without Ethiopia, the current peace agreement is particularly a credit to Kenya. But the merit of Johnson's book is that he writes clearly enough that one can make up one's own mind about the extent to which the facts he presents justify his conclusions."

[Namrirru · Rating 3 out of 5]

He mostly goes over politics and warfare, not so much about the people who are affected by both. There's so much attention to detail that information gets a little mushed. The SPLA and all its factions and leaders are quite ineffective against Khartoum's policies and attacks, especially when those factions are corrupt and are fighting amongst themselves. He never really states this or gives a very clear picture of the whole scenario. He'll spotlight one person or group and then head on to another without making clear connections from one to another. The reader has to construct their own bridges, which might end up misguided. Plus, there's so little on the actual civilians, it has to be a misguided if this is the only source the reader reads on Sudan.

Putting pieces together, it seems as though the Sudanese civil war is lopsided in favor of Khartoum, which traditionally exploited and enslaved the South. Those who stand up and fight against the North tend to be corrupt, favoring tribal links and personal gain than truly protecting their own people. Khartoum takes advantage of their weaknesses to tighten its control over the area.

This is all local politics, it says nothing about the civil war on the homefront, the rape of the economy and the people, destroying the future for those who stay, making them totally dependent on Khartoum for any meager capital or prone to join a rebellious organization. Plus, the author barely dips into global politics, and why no country or agency tries to interfere with the killing.

See Prunier's "Darfur" and Arnold's, "History of Modern Africa."

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of the best accounts of Sudan that I've read since I've arrived here. It definately focuses more on the North South war than say Darfur or the East, but it also briefly addresses issues in these regions. If you are interested in the tit for tat and then the break up of the SPLA, militias in ths south, and leadership in Khartoum, you will likely benefit from this book.

[Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book in great detail illustrates the complexities of the Sudanese conflicts. The current conflicts were already forecast in the breakdown of the 1972 agreement. How does the international community not get more involved in Sudan?

[Deb · Rating 4 out of 5]

a surprisingly gripping read...tragic though to be in this country (sudan i mean) and realise how extraordinary the people are and to read about the terrible suffering they have undergone and to see it all starting up again as the elections loom...so unjust

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dense.

[Kathleen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very factual, but let's be honest, also very dry.