This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/world/africa/truce-in-south-sudan.html

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Cease-Fire Signed in South Sudan Conflict Cease-Fire Signed in South Sudan Conflict
(35 minutes later)
NAIROBI, Kenya — The government of South Sudan and rebels loyal to the country’s ousted former vice president signed a cease-fire agreement on Thursday, holding out the prospect of peace after more than a month of fighting that has torn the new nation apart.NAIROBI, Kenya — The government of South Sudan and rebels loyal to the country’s ousted former vice president signed a cease-fire agreement on Thursday, holding out the prospect of peace after more than a month of fighting that has torn the new nation apart.
Under the agreement, signed in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, both sides in the conflict promise to lay down their arms. But they have also said that a cessation of hostilities would be a temporary measure, short of a formal peace agreement, and that negotiations would have to continue. Under the agreement, signed in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, both sides in the conflict promised to lay down their arms. But they have also said that a cessation of hostilities would be a temporary measure, short of a formal peace agreement, and that negotiations would have to continue.
While humanitarian groups welcomed the cease-fire as an opportunity to restore peace and stability, political analysts urged restraint, saying that a cease-fire was only the first step in bringing an end to a civil war that has killed thousands and displaced more than half a million South Sudanese.While humanitarian groups welcomed the cease-fire as an opportunity to restore peace and stability, political analysts urged restraint, saying that a cease-fire was only the first step in bringing an end to a civil war that has killed thousands and displaced more than half a million South Sudanese.
“We have to be very cautious,” said Zacharia Diing Akol, director of training at the Sudd Institute, an independent research group in the South Sudanese capital, Juba. “Today is just going to be the first step toward stopping violence, but the long and arduous process of real negotiations are going to begin.”“We have to be very cautious,” said Zacharia Diing Akol, director of training at the Sudd Institute, an independent research group in the South Sudanese capital, Juba. “Today is just going to be the first step toward stopping violence, but the long and arduous process of real negotiations are going to begin.”
Refugees, many of them unaccompanied children, have streamed across the border by the tens of thousands into Uganda, Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya. More than 70,000 people are sheltering at United Nations bases in South Sudan, afraid that they will be killed either by crossfire or in targeted attacks.Refugees, many of them unaccompanied children, have streamed across the border by the tens of thousands into Uganda, Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya. More than 70,000 people are sheltering at United Nations bases in South Sudan, afraid that they will be killed either by crossfire or in targeted attacks.
“The world’s newest nation, plagued by conflict for the past month, has today been given a second chance,” said José Barahona, Oxfam’s country director for South Sudan, in a statement following the announcement of the deal.“The world’s newest nation, plagued by conflict for the past month, has today been given a second chance,” said José Barahona, Oxfam’s country director for South Sudan, in a statement following the announcement of the deal.
Neighboring countries and global powers, including the United States, China and the United Nations, placed significant pressure on the parties to reach an agreement, fearing that the fighting could escalate into a protracted civil war or even a wider regional conflict. Ugandan troops have been fighting alongside government forces, helping to push back the rebels.Neighboring countries and global powers, including the United States, China and the United Nations, placed significant pressure on the parties to reach an agreement, fearing that the fighting could escalate into a protracted civil war or even a wider regional conflict. Ugandan troops have been fighting alongside government forces, helping to push back the rebels.
The South Sudanese government of President Salva Kiir and the rebels had difficulty finding common ground, in particular on the question of the release of prisoners who support the former vice president, Riek Machar. But the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the regional group that has mediated the negotiations, announced that the two sides had finally reached an agreement, which was signed on Thursday evening after a delay of several hours.The South Sudanese government of President Salva Kiir and the rebels had difficulty finding common ground, in particular on the question of the release of prisoners who support the former vice president, Riek Machar. But the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the regional group that has mediated the negotiations, announced that the two sides had finally reached an agreement, which was signed on Thursday evening after a delay of several hours.
Negotiators have spent weeks at the luxury Sheraton hotel in Addis Ababa, discussing a deal that could bring an end to the fighting. Negotiators spent weeks at the luxury Sheraton hotel in Addis Ababa, discussing a deal that could bring an end to the fighting.
The conflict began on Dec. 15 with a clash at a military barracks in Juba. PresidentMr. Kiir accused his rival, Mr. Machar, of staging a coup attempt. Mr. Machar denied it and fled to the bush. Forces loyal Mr. Machar, who was ousted as vice president in July, took up arms against the government. Fighting between the two sides quickly escalated and state capitals including Bor, Malakal and Bentiu have changed hands repeatedly, with heavy casualties for civilians as well as combatants. The conflict began on Dec. 15 with a clash at a military barracks in Juba. Mr. Kiir accused his rival, Mr. Machar, of staging a coup attempt. Mr. Machar denied it and fled to the bush. Forces loyal to Mr. Machar, who was ousted as vice president in July, took up arms against the government. Fighting between the two sides quickly escalated and state capitals including Bor, Malakal and Bentiu have changed hands repeatedly, with heavy casualties for civilians as well as combatants.
“Amnesties, political and economic rewards are basically what the government has had in its tool box for peace agreements up until now,” said David Kwol Deng, research director of the South Sudan Law Society. “Until people see that leaders are held accountable, there’s no way to buy into the idea of a new nation in South Sudan. We’ll just remain a bunch of communities that are all protecting themselves.” “Amnesties, political and economic rewards are basically what the government has had in its toolbox for peace agreements up until now,” said David Kwol Deng, research director of the South Sudan Law Society. “Until people see that leaders are held accountable, there’s no way to buy into the idea of a new nation in South Sudan. We’ll just remain a bunch of communities that are all protecting themselves.”
“If we want sustainable peace, we have to dig deep and face some of the problems the country has been dealing with for the last nine years,” Mr. Deng said. “That can’t be done just with the signatures of the two parties involved.”“If we want sustainable peace, we have to dig deep and face some of the problems the country has been dealing with for the last nine years,” Mr. Deng said. “That can’t be done just with the signatures of the two parties involved.”
Mr. Akol of the Sudd Institute said that cease-fire “allows them to sit around the negotiating table and address some of the real issues, the root causes of the problem.” But he added that he could not rule out a return to violent conflict “if either of the parties thinks that they are in a weaker position to negotiate when fighting is not ongoing.”Mr. Akol of the Sudd Institute said that cease-fire “allows them to sit around the negotiating table and address some of the real issues, the root causes of the problem.” But he added that he could not rule out a return to violent conflict “if either of the parties thinks that they are in a weaker position to negotiate when fighting is not ongoing.”