Home » Press & Media » Public Speeches

Future Trends Foundation / UNMIS Symposium,
Grand Holiday Villa, Khartoum

3 November 2009

Chairman Sir Derek Plumbly's Speech at the Future Trends Foundation / UNMIS Symposium on Unity and Self Determination

I would like to thank the Future Trends Foundation and UNMIS (and in particular Khalid Mansour and his colleagues in public affairs) for staging this symposium and for bringing together such a distinguished group of participants. I will do my best to be candid. I should stress that the views I express here, though they draw in part on discussions in the AEC, are my own.

The frank and open debate we have had over of the past two days is long overdue.  The Government of the South organised a forum on the referendum in Juba exactly a year ago.  But there has been little since by way of serious debate, particularly of an inclusive North/South kind and - with a few notable exceptions such as the columns Mahjoub Muhamad Salih has been writing in al-Ayyam - little by way of informed discussion in the media.

I hope that the symposium will give rise to further such exchanges, deepening understanding of the challenges and the possibilities ahead.  It is very important that the discussions that need to take place between the CPA partners on the implications of the two options which will be put to the people of the South in January 2011, on what have come to be known in diplomatic shorthand as “post referendum arrangements”, should be paralleled and informed by a broader debate involving those outside government.

Paradoxically outsiders have been more active.  A number of think tanks outside Sudan have produced material on post referendum issues.  But the CPA partners themselves have yet to begin discussions face to face.  The AEC, in the Mid Term Evaluation it published almost 18 months ago, highlighted as a priority the need for work to begin on preparations for 2011 and beyond.  That need is now urgent and pressing.

There is no scope in the CPA for revisiting the January 2011 date, and any attempt to do so would carry with it the gravest of risks.  Only 15 months now remain to the self determination referendum.  A lot of effort has of course gone into negotiation of the draft legislation, the referendum bill, which will establish the referendum commission and provide for the modalities to be followed in the referendum – with regard to eligibility, registration procedures, the vote, international monitoring and so on.  With only one substantive issue reportedly outstanding  agreement between the parties on the draft  should now be in sight - though the bill will of course still have to go to the National Constitutional Review Commission, the Council of Ministers and then the National Assembly for consideration once it is agreed by the parties.

It is imperative that the referendum bill be adopted by the present Assembly not just to be in line with the CPA, though that is certainly important, but also because many of the practical arrangements provided for in it – formation of the referendum commission, allocation of a budget, appointment of staff, selection of registration teams, voter education -  will take time to put into effect.  Given the seriousness of the issue, the referendum modalities need to be robust.  The referendum as a whole needs to be well prepared, and such as to convince the people of the South that their right to self determination has been freely and fairly exercised, and that their choice – whatever it may be – will be fully respected and treated as binding by all.

Clearly it is important that the choice when it is made is an informed one, and that the voters should understand what lies behind the two options presented to them.  The CPA tells us in minute detail about the arrangements that are to obtain during the interim period.  We have no clear roadmap for the period afterwards, whether in the event of unity – should existing wealth sharing arrangements continue, for example? – or, still more, in the case of secession.  The initiation of discussions between the parties on post referendum arrangements – addressing relevant issues on both scenarios, unity and separation – cannot be much further delayed.    It is for the parties to determine the format for such discussions; but I am sure that Sudan’s regional and international partners will be ready to assist them in whatever way with expertise and support.

The starting point for such discussions should it seems to me be the interdependence of North and South in Sudan.  That will not change, whatever the outcome of the referendum in January 2011.  It is presently total in the oil sector, and thus critical to the economic well being of North and South.  It is crucial in border areas, where communities straddle the border or move across it seasonally. Demarcation of the border is now desperately overdue. But the border itself need not be a barrier, and the traditional way of life of communities along it should be protected whatever the result of the referendum.  The human dimension is not of course confined to the border areas: interdependence is evident to all of us in a city like Khartoum, where communities from North and South live side by side and have done so now for decades.

There are therefore strong ties of mutual self interest between North and South in Sudan, and these will continue to obtain whatever the result of the self determination referendum.  They are the best guarantee that the peace the CPA has brought will be sustained.  But political understandings and transitional arrangements reflecting them need to be negotiated and agreed before the referendum, so as to ensure, not just that the people’s choice is an informed one, but also that the transition to whatever follows is smooth and peaceful.  Too much is at stake to leave this to the last minute.

The CPA aspiration to make unity attractive has informed discussions in the AEC, as it did last year’s Mid Term Evaluation and will the new report we hope to submit in January 2010.  We have pointed, and will continue to point, to steps which might help make unity attractive – among which successful elections in 2010 have always seemed among the most important. But I have noted in interventions elsewhere that while a lot has been achieved in CPA implementation over the past five years, progress has been least visible on provisions – that of a programme of national reconciliation and healing, for example – which might have been most relevant to making unity attractive. It is possible that new ideas which might help will emerge in discussions on post-referendum arrangements. But you do not need to be a frequent visitor to the South, like myself, to know that the possibility of a vote for secession is real.  Let us not forget in this context that the aspiration is to make unity attractive.  History suggests that the alternative approach, of seeking to make separation painful, will only heighten the sentiment it is designed to check.

Sudan is entering a period of change and uncertainty, but it is also one of immense opportunity.  The self determination referendum should serve to lay to rest, one way or the other, once and for all, a conflict which has caused immense suffering for more than half a century.  It may seem counter intuitive to say this in a week when relations between the parties look more than usually turbulent but I am confident that they can together steer us successfully to this goal – confident because mutual self-interest and neighbourliness all press in that direction. They should certainly benefit from wider debate of the sort which has taken place here over the past two days, and the ideas generated.  But at the risk of laboring the point, they do need in my view soon to start their own direct discussions on post referendum arrangements.  In this they will as I said have the strongest support from the international partners represented in the AEC.

End of speech