How do South Sudanese perceive peace in their country?

Sudanese refugees who have fled from the war in Sudan get off a truck loaded with families arriving at a Transit Centre for refugees in Renk, on February 13, 2024. Thousands have now fled from the war in Sudan to South Sudan since the conflict exploded in April 2023, according to the United Nations. The war-torn country of Sudan is currently ravaged by internal fighting between the Sudanese Army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Picture: LUIS TATO / AFP

James Kunhiak Muorwel and Jan Pospisil

South Sudanese leaders have been vying for power since the country’s independence on July 9, 2011, fueling outbreaks of civil war and incidents of extreme violence across the country. While the main warring parties signed a peace agreement in 2018, localized violence has persisted in many parts of the country, creating a patchwork of insecurity. In this context, the country is neither in civil war nor fully at peace.

One element that is often missing from discussions on peace and conflict in South Sudan is how South Sudanese themselves perceive the situation in their communities and country. Do they think the country is at peace? What does peace mean to them? And who are the main actors they see as promoting peace?

To help answer these questions, the PeaceRep program and Detcro research, funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office and Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, have conducted an annual survey. The 2023 edition sampled 4,482 participants across the country and complemented these findings with in-depth interviews in four locations of South Sudan. This research revealed that perceptions vary widely across the country and between men and women, underscoring how people’s experiences with conflict and violence impact their understanding of peace.

Conflict Landscape in South Sudan: A Web of Actors and Interests

Since South Sudan’s independence in 2011, no national elections have been held, millions have been displaced, and the country has undergone severe economic stress. Violent conflicts have been blamed for most of these challenges.

Wrangles for power at the national level have spilled into ugly wars at the subnational level, while subnational feuds have also shaped politics at the national level. President Salva Kiir and his deputy-turned-nemesis Vice President Riek Machar have dominated the country’s tribal-based politics, exploiting its ethno-linguistic diversity to pit tribes against each other to score political points. Although the major wars have started in Juba, violence has been most prevalent in remote towns, with recurring land and border disputes, cattle rustling, revenge killings, and abductions across the Lakes, Warrap, Unity, Jonglei, and Upper Nile states.

The conflict parties in South Sudan have also used sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) as a weapon of war, especially in areas of active rebellion. This violence is often directed against women and girls and remains persistent despite international pressure and the signing of an action plan between the government and opposition forces to curb SGBV.

What Do South Sudanese Think about Peace?

Perceptions of peace in South Sudan reflect this complex landscape of conflict. Overall, more than two-thirds of South Sudanese surveyed in 2023 said the country was at peace—a significant improvement from around half of respondents in 2021. While the official peace process is focused on power-sharing among political elites, the views of the broader population are more shaped by their everyday experience. Respondents with a good perception of their everyday security were more than 35 percentage points more likely to say the country was at peace (79% to 43%). When asked about the three main elements of peace, 61% of respondents prioritized safety, followed by justice at 43%. “Softer” elements such as rights (31%) and happiness, reconciliation, and respect (all around 28%) were also important, demonstrating a desire for a more positive, comprehensive vision of peace that goes beyond the mere absence of violence.

However, there were notable differences among respondents depending on their local experiences of conflict and violence. Respondents in areas less affected by conflict, such as Renk and Yirol West, placed a higher priority on safety compared to those in conflict-ridden regions like Yei and Pibor. At the same time, those in conflict-affected regions, as well as those living in internally displaced persons (IDPs) camps, tended to place a higher priority on justice. This could be a response to historical injustices such as displacement, land grabbing, and political marginalization.

The survey also reveals gendered differences in perceptions of peace. Women’s views on peace tend to be more expansive, with greater focus on rights, happiness, and welfare, while men’s views focus more on safety and justice. This likely reflects women’s broader experiences of vulnerability in conflict zones, while men are more directly affected by the threat of being drawn into armed violence.

Compared to peace and security, respondents were more negative about the protection of human rights in South Sudan. Political and civil rights have deteriorated significantly since South Sudan’s independence. Thirty percent of respondents were unable to identify any institution that effectively safeguards their rights. Notably, more than half of those surveyed (55%) expressed skepticism about human rights being guaranteed in their communities, with only 42% voicing optimism. Perceptions of rights protections vary significantly across regions, with more politically stable regions such as Greater Bahr El-Ghazal demonstrating higher confidence in human rights guarantees.

Looking at which rights are protected or endangered highlights improvements in security in South Sudan even as the political environment remains closed. The right to life is widely seen as protected (60% said that it is well-protected vs. 36% that it is not protected), while freedom of expression is viewed as endangered (19% said that it is well-protected vs. 50% that it is not protected). This reflects the broader political environment, where the ability to speak freely is significantly restricted.

Trust in Peace Actors in South Sudan

Throughout the violent history of South Sudan, peace actors have never been in short supply. Yet there is wide variation in the extent to which South Sudanese see these actors as bringing peace. Confidence in state institutions is extremely low, particularly in the office of the president and other high-ranking government officials. The police, judiciary, and armed forces receive slightly better, but still limited, levels of public trust. However, the armed forces are also viewed by many as a source of human rights violations, underscoring their dual role as both protectors and violators of peace and rights.

Compared to state institutions, many South Sudanese have greater trust in local peace actors like the church and traditional leaders. Traditional authorities play an important role in conflict resolution, particularly in rural areas like Rumbek Centre County. For example, traditional courts administered by local chiefs remain central to resolving community disputes, especially over issues like land and cattle theft. Their rulings are widely respected and contribute to local-level peacebuilding, even as more serious crimes, like murder, are dealt with by formal state institutions, often through extralegal means. South Sudanese also value the role of civil society organizations in finding solutions to conflicts, especially at the grassroots level.

The UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) is also widely trusted as a peace actor in South Sudan. Despite ruffling the feathers of the government on occasion, the mission is held in high regard by ordinary citizens. For example, 21% of respondents think that UNMISS safeguards human rights, significantly higher than the national institutions that should play this role. Participants in key informant and focus group interviews held in four states also saw UNMISS as a key peacebuilding actor, especially in the locations most affected by conflict such as Yei in Central Equatoria state. This perception is in contrast with other UN missions such as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Mali, where surveys have found that the majority of respondents felt that the peacekeeping missions there should leave their respective countries.

Conclusion

Perceptions of peace in South Sudan are shaped by both immediate security conditions and long-term grievances related to justice and human rights. While everyday security experiences play a role in shaping views of the peace process, they have less influence on broader conceptions of peace, which are more closely tied to collective, historical experiences of violence. This suggests that policy interventions aimed at promoting peace in South Sudan must address both immediate security needs and deeper, structural issues related to justice and rights, especially as the country approaches its scheduled elections in 2026. During this period, UNMISS and other peace actors will continue to play a vital role.

* James Kunhiak Muorwel is a Project Manager for Youth, Peace and Security at UNESCO’s Juba office. Previously, he was a Senior Gender Adviser for UN Women. Jan Pospisil is an Associate Professor (Research) at Coventry University’s Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations and co-investigator at the University of Edinburgh’s Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform (PeaceRep) program.

** This article was originally published in https://theglobalobservatory.org/

*** The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of The African.