Ambassador Emmanuel Aban Ajawin, the Secretary-General of the South Sudan Opposition Movements Alliance (SSOMA), has said there are no valid reasons to move the peace talks between the Government of South Sudan and the holdout groups which have been being mediated by the Community of Sant’Egidio in Rome to Kenya.
In December 2023, President Salva Kiir wrote to his Kenyan counterpart, Samuel Ruto, requesting the latter to mediate talks between the government and the Non-Signatory South Sudan Opposition Group (NSSOG).
The group is made up of the National Salvation Front (NAS) led by Gen. Thomas Cirillo, Real SPLM led by former SPLM Party Secretary-General Pagan Amum, South Sudan United Front/Army (SSUF/A) of former army chief Gen. Paul Malong, the National Democratic Movement-Patriotic Front (NDM-PF) of Amb. Emmanuel Ajawin and the South Sudan National Movement for Change/Army (SSNMC/A). The Real SPLM and SSUF/A however acquiesced to moving the talks to Kenya.
In an exclusive interview with Radio Tamazuj, Amb. Ajawin sheds light on recent developments regarding the peace negotiations, the proposed relocation of talks to Kenya, and SSOMA’s concerns and stand.
Below are edited excerpts:
Question: Can you tell us about your journey to Rome and what happened there?
Answer: Thank you for this opportunity. In January, the three leaders from the National Salvation Front (NAS), the South Sudan National Movement for Change (SSNMC), and the National Democratic Movement (NDM) wrote a letter to the Kenyan President, Samuel Ruto, outlining our concerns about the Kenyan initiative. We had questions that needed answers before we could accept or reject the initiative.
We proposed that before making a final decision, we should consult among ourselves as holdout groups and suggested Rome as the venue for these consultations. The Kenyan president agreed to our proposal and we scheduled a meeting in Rome for 11 April.
In Rome, we met with the Kenyan delegation led by Joseph Anok, the former governor of Turkana County currently serving in the office of the President in Kenya. Also present was Ambassador Mohammed Koyo, the deputy to Kenyan Special Envoy General Lazarus Sumbweyo.
Representing SSOMA were General Thomas Cirillo and myself and the Community of Sant’Egidio chaired the meeting.
During the meeting, the Kenyan delegation addressed two main issues. Firstly, they discussed the concerns raised by SSOMA leaders regarding their security during peace talks in Kenya. Secondly, they outlined a roadmap for resuming peace talks in Kenya.
As SSOMA representatives, we voiced several concerns and suggested that negotiations should resume in Rome. We emphasized that the Rome Peace Talks originated from an initiative by His Holiness Pope Francis during a retreat for South Sudanese leaders. It was a historic moment when the Pope knelt and kissed the feet of these leaders, urging them to work for peace and stability in South Sudan. Rome then initiated consultations with the Community of Sant’Egidio, as per Pope Francis’s request.
President Salva Kiir’s decision to relocate the peace talks to Kenya was made without consulting us. As SSOMA leaders, we believe we have moral, religious, and human responsibilities. We cannot disregard Pope Francis’s initiative, especially considering his humble act of kissing our leaders’ feet, which carries significant weight given his leadership of over two billion Catholics worldwide.
When we inquired about President Kiir’s rationale, the Kenyan delegation indicated that Kiir did not provide a clear explanation. Therefore, it appears there is no valid reason for involving Kenya in a new initiative. Hence, we are convinced that peace talks should continue in Rome.
The second point we addressed was our willingness to include the Kenyan delegation in the peace talks in Rome. If Kenya is keen on playing an active role in mediating the talks, we are open to their participation. Cooperation between the Kenyan delegation and the Community of Sant’Egidio to facilitate the peace process in Rome is welcome.
The Kenyan delegation assured us that they would relay our concerns to their president and communicate his response back to us.
Q: Earlier, SSOMA raised concerns about security in Kenya during negotiations and mentioned other issues. Now, there is talk about the Pope’s initiative. Can you clarify?
A: The security concern was not the primary issue we raised. We had various questions and wanted to learn more about the initiative from the Kenyan delegation. Security was just one aspect of our inquiries, not the main focus.
After meeting the Kenyan delegation, we found no clear reason for relocating negotiations from Rome to Nairobi. They explained that the Kenyan initiative complements the Rome peace talks. So, we proposed continuing talks in Rome since it’s already established.
We asked if they objected to talks remaining in Rome, to which they replied they had no issue, but they were acting on the president’s request. We suggested finalizing the decision on the location of talks before discussing security and other matters. If talks were to move to Nairobi, then we could address security concerns.
Q: If the government insisted on relocating the peace talks to Nairobi after some SSOMA members initially accepted, how would you respond?
A: I cannot speak for all opposition groups, but if President Kiir insisted on moving talks to Kenya, it would signal to the international and Catholic communities that South Sudan’s government has abandoned Pope Francis’s initiative.
Initially, the government embraced Pope Francis’s initiative, using it for political gain, especially after the Pope visited Juba. However, there has been little progress since then, indicating a lack of seriousness on the government’s part.
We still believe the government lacks a valid reason to move talks from Rome to Nairobi. When asked, they cited geographic convenience, not the content of discussions. This abrupt relocation without clear justification seems like a political maneuver lacking sincerity.
If negotiations fail in Nairobi, will President Kiir suggest moving talks to Mogadishu, Djibouti, or South Africa? Continuously relocating without valid reasons will not bring peace, especially when South Sudanese face economic hardship and security challenges.
President Kiir should prioritize engaging in the Rome Talks which have been ongoing for over four years instead of hastily relocating to Nairobi without justification.
Q: Could relocating talks to Nairobi signify the failure of the Community of Sant’Egidio to mediate after four years with no progress? Could it offer hope?
A: So far, we cannot say the Rome Talks have failed. No official announcement indicates a deadlock in negotiations. The talks have not failed.
The issue lies with the government delegation’s lack of seriousness. They employ tactical maneuvers during negotiations. For instance, they suspended talks after an incident on the Juba-Nimule road, blaming NAS forces. Also, when we proposed a roundtable dialogue, they promised consultation but then suggested moving talks to Nairobi. Any delay in the Rome Talks stems from the government delegation’s behavior. They have never been committed to the process.
President Kiir’s failure to implement agreements, even basic security arrangements, underscores their lack of seriousness. They focus narrowly on power-sharing and returning opposition forces to Juba, ignoring the broader need for peace.
Q: Did the Kenyan delegation give you a timeframe for their feedback?
A: No, they did not. We emphasized that negotiations are a process, not a single event. Parties need ongoing consultation before direct negotiations involving all stakeholders. We also stressed that negotiations should not be tied to upcoming elections, as they are separate issues. We must address the root causes of our country’s problems to find comprehensive solutions.