In his Wars, Guns and Votes, Paul Collier explains some fascinating yet disturbing findings on occurrences of electoral violence in the ‘bottom billion’ countries especially in Africa. The main thrust of his findings is that democracy is very dangerous in poor countries leading not to pluralism and popular participation, but to polarization and instability and even over conflict. This has been seen to happen in a relatively stable democracy like Kenya.
Now substitute Sudan for Kenya. Throw in some uniquely Sudan complexities like:
1. This is the first time since 1986 that Sudan is going into a multiparty election. The current leader came to power through a coup in 1989.
2. A key aspect of the elections, i.e. the Census results of 2008, are highly contended by the two main principles to the CPA, the SPLM and NCP. These results are very crucial in determining the representation formula and resource allocations at the national level and local levels.
3. There are nightmarish logistical challenges like delivering ballots to very remote areas in Africa’s biggest country, assisting illiterate electorate vote (like in the South where they will vote in 12 ballots!), counting and tallying of the votes, etc etc.
4. The referendum less than a year away for these elections. In addition, should the South vote for separation in the 2011 plebiscite, there are some electoral posts that will have to be scrapped and probably another election could be called in 2011.
5. Darfur: hundreds of thousands refused to register fort he elections since they are holed up in IDP camps and want to vote in their original homes. The Electoral Commission did not make any provision for voting in the IDP camps, thus they will not be allowed to vote. So, a large constituency will essentially be excluded in the most important elections in the country.
As Savo Heleta puts it, these elections may turn out to be a destabilizing factor in an already fragile political and security situation.
Maybe we should wait till after the referendum; or just hold executive elections (presidency and state governorships?)
Feb 22, 2010 @ 19:58:47
Hi Joshua,
I totally agree with you. There are far too many issues that are not yet resolved.
I believe Bashir will capitalize on these shortcomings to rig the elections.
The CPA is in serious jeopardy.
Feb 25, 2010 @ 13:09:19
Hi,
A casual talk with a Bor Dinka revealed to me the depth of the division in the south Sudan. He said something like ” it is easier for me to live with an Arab than a Murle”. We all know what this means if you resent your next door neighbor to that extent as the two tribes shares borders. One has to find another place to live or you sign up to a permanent crucible.
The reason we are students of conflict is basically to alleviate conflicts which to makes the most sense, negotiate for cease fire, mediate and build peace eventually. Wars are expensive as Paul Collier illustrates with equating each civil war with losing two years of income (at the risk of simplifying war costs). As much as aid is flowing freely to the south we can as sure as morning comes see a build up to a cataclysm.
More aid should be diverted to the preparation of cessation in a pre-conflict scenario. As GOSS concentrates on the intrigues of the North and salivating at the possible spoils in their hands someone should be uniting clans and tribes in the South. Maybe GOSS will appreciate that the North was not such a bad idea if only it served to keep the south united by providing them with a common enemy. Every people needs a uniting factor and the North factor has been the glue holding South Sudan during the entire struggle period. Considering the multiplicity of actors and interests in the South this needs to be given priority by any country that has deeper interests in Sudan especially a New South Sudan!
Of course we shall get the same prescription: an democratic election immediately, a working and a strong party system and all. But we all know this doesn’t make sense in Sudan at the moment. Of course anyone can rig an election in South Sudan at the moment with their low capacity of education and human capital they are vulnerable to the elite. Development is major public good that will build this country but it lowest time frame is ten years after cessation. Scholars must crack this matrix in advance and offer a clear pre – conflict mediation and post cessation plan despite the tantrums from the North that denies the obvious results that the referendum comes to confirm.
Simon Gachunia
USIU