As pressure mounts on the government and opposition in South Sudan to fully implement the already agreed upon transitional government of national unity, the opposition has hit out at the government for not creating a conducive environment for the same.

This, the opposition claims, is the “most significant” obstacle to the peace agreement signed seven months ago in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia by both sides.

However, sources familiar with the matter say the opposition accusation is meant to mask the mutual disinterest both sides of the divide have shown over working together again.

For President Salva Kiir’s government, a strict adherence to the timetable for the full implementation of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) is certain to further rile his ranks as it presents in the immediate and personal terms, a loss of positions in government — the surest guarantee to livelihoods in the face of worsening economic conditions.

For the Riek Machar-led opposition, any quick return to the capital Juba inevitably binds them to the free-falling economy. This will oblige them to facilitate the full resumption of oil production, the country’s main economic lifeline, since they largely control areas where oil is produced. Yet to do so will result in them losing the full political capital they need to extract from the current economic situation, explained a source who did not wish to be identified.

ALSO READ: South Sudan sides trade barbs over peace progress after sanctions threat

Some observers say this is why Dr Machar, the designated First Vice President, has insisted on a complete demilitarisation of Juba before his return, including the provision of him bringing his war assets, which has elicited government criticism by its own supporters as ceding undue advantage in the capital.

The Troika (US, Norway and Britain) and the European Union, which had pledged to transport the opposition forces to Juba, are said to have balked at Dr Machar’s demilitarisation demands, because of concerns that they (Troika) could easily be held responsible in the unlikely event that the Agreement collapses and fighting erupts again.

“In the short term, the full implementation of the Agreement favours no one. Those in government who are supposed to implement it are its first victims and so they are reluctant [to implement it]. But there are no guarantees either that even when they [opposition] re-join government they will particularly gain anything out of it. What therefore is needed is for more sensitisation about the long term gains, which there is no doubt outweigh the immediate gains where there is a lot of focus now,” added the source.

Building communities

These gains include ending suffering and displacement, which some reports indicate have further regressed already fledgling communities; restoring people to production, which is crucial to revamping the economy alongside the return to full operation of other sectors, and restoring trust, which is key to meaningful dialogue and reconciliation among communities.

“Despite its imperfections, the Agreement provides the best opportunity for South Sudan to restore peace and stability. But it is only as strong as the political will that accompanies it, and, on this front, the resilience of the South Sudanese people continues to be severely tested by their leaders,” Festus Mogae, who chairs the commission tasked to monitor and evaluate it, told the UN Security Council last month.

On March 22, the opposition cited the arrest of three members of their disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration team, the increase of the states in the country from 10 to 28, a decision the government took six months ago and has insisted it will not rescind, and the continued military offensive on the opposition’s cantonment areas as evidence of the government’s failure to implement a transitional government.

“The failure of the Salva Kiir Administration to recognise the reality of SPLM/SPLA (in opposition)…is frustrating the security arrangements, which would facilitate the safe return to Juba of the First Vice President Designate — Dr Riek Machar Teny — and the much anticipated formation of the Transitional Government of National Unity,” noted Mabior Garang de Mabior, the opposition’s spokesperson, in a statement.

“The Movement calls on President Kiir to rein in all the hardliners in and out of government who are making peace impossible and immediately return to the full implementation of the ARCISS in good faith. The SPLM/SPLA (in opposition) is fully committed the letter and spirit of the ARCISS,” the statement added.

The accusations, which Juba had yet to respond to, came five days after the UN Security Council slammed both parties for failing to fully adhere to their commitments to implement the Agreement, which both sides signed to bring to an end the two-year conflict.

The Security Council’s criticisms was caused by what it described as ongoing violence in the country and human rights violations and abuses and violations of international humanitarian law as detailed in two reports by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan.

Effectively, the Security Council set five steps for the parties to take towards the full implementation of the Agreement.

Specifically, the Council directed both parties to fully and immediately adhere to the permanent ceasefire prescribed in the Agreement; that they should both offer full co-operation to the complete implementation of the Juba security arrangements as agreed.

That the president, the first vice-president, and vice-president, should take up their positions in Juba as agreed; that they should hold a dialogue on the October 2 presidential decree that created the 28 new states; and last, that both parties should protect civilians and civilian facilities, including schools and hospitals, and allow free movement of and access to communities especially for the timely delivery of humanitarian assistance to all those who need it.