The Effects of War and Peace on Foreign Aid — A Focus on Southern Sudan

TheEffects of War and Peace on Foreign Aid — A Focus on Southern Sudan

Itwas reasoned that the issues in Southern Sudan would be entirelyovercome through granting it independence. Indeed, the move wasunanimously welcome and advocated, resulting to a split, and SouthernSudan became a newly established, independent state from main Sudan(now Northern Sudan). Intriguing is the fact that peace problemswould not be wholly resolved. Independence seemed to be a culminationof yet another conflict in Southern Sudan. This paper explores theeffect of war and peace on foreign aid, focusing on the case ofSouthern Sudan.

Thecountry has been facing the civil war conflict. These tensions andconflicts are instigated by social and cultural factors. Theatmosphere has elicited concerns from diplomats, and concerned groupshave sought to help the young nation to avert a humanitarian crisis.It is worth noting that tension and conflicts in Southern Sudan areassociated with tribal inclinations, in particular, those aboutsharing of resources, disarmament processes, resettlement ofdisplaced person, weaknesses in government and border demarcationissues, clash in lifestyles, as well as leadership and employmentopportunities. All these issues are entangled in a certain way,presenting the peace situation in Southern Sudan as deplorable.Considering the adversity of the situation, the country has been oneof the destinations of foreign aid expenditure.

Thetrends in Foreign Aids — Has the war and peace resulted in theincrease or decrease in Foreign aid?

SouthernSudan situation has been attracting various forms of foreign aid,includingUSAID, UN, and UKAID (Bryden &amp Brickhill, 2015).

2000-2009. 2000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

20013

2014

2015

Arab countries 146.6

Netherlands 44.2

US 140.1

EU 359.4

US 423.3

US 845.4

US 796.2

US 725,6

US 828.3

US 992.66

Norway 31.4

EU 39.8

Norway 46.0

US 202.1

UK 127.8

EU 263.2

EU 359.9

EU 274.3

EU 277.3

UK 335.9

Netherlands 29.7

Norway 29.5

Netherlands 39.0

Norway 57.5

Netherlands 123.78

UK 212.8

UK 224.9

Netherlands 219.8

UK 199.9

EU 231.9

Theforeign aid has focused on six areas of social and economicdevelopment, including humanitarian assistance, food, peace, andsecurity, investing in people and the government process. As far asforeign assistance is concerned, foreign aid has been striving toaddress area of human welfare such as hygiene, infrastructure,health, shelter, and sanitation. For instance, USAID has been givingover $127.6&nbspmillion since 2004 channeling towards to hygiene,infrastructure, health, shelter, and sanitation (Bradbury, 2012).Sudan has been the largest destination of USAID, accounting for itsannual budget of over $30&nbspmillion dollars, whose expenditure hasfocused on provision of basic services, food security and addressingthe needs of refugees and returnees (Deng, 2014).

Thegoal for the foreign aid for Southern Sudan has been increasing thecapacity of dealing with conflicts that threaten stability andviolence associated with thehuman crisis. The foreign aidseeks tobuild consensus based on effective political processes. To assurepeace, the donors are also concerned about improving the governmentin advocacy for democracy. USAID provides assistance in developingpriorities for the government and generating incomes andinternational oversight. To support economic growth, foreign aid iscommitted to improving connections and infrastructure, and favorableenvironment for market development (Matia, 2014).

Effectof Foreign Aid — has it reduced Poverty?

Foreignaid has had some significant impact on social and economicdevelopment. Some of the areas that the country has benefited arehealth and food security. For instance, foreign aid has played acrucial role in providing and enhancing emergency obstetric andnewborn service care. Foreign aid has also helped in training thehealth workers to increase their capacity of providing equitableservices needed by the communities. The foreign funds have played acrucial role in helpingto combat communicable diseases such asdiarrhea, malaria, and pneumonia. Another area that the foreign aidhas been beneficial is food security. According to Branch andMampilly (2015), over 57, 000 households were employed to serve thefood for work network, providing support to thousands ofbeneficiaries in the country, especially women, and children. Thefunds have benefited agricultural sector, through activities such astraining and provision of fertilizers.

Despitethese developments, the country still suffers from various social andeconomic challenges. For instance, the country’s economy continuesto overly on the oil export activities, sometimes accounting for assignificant as 98 percent of the countries revenue. Although SouthernSudan is endowed with arable land, only 5 percent is undercultivation. Besides, the average life expectancy of its citizens is55 years, and the maternal mortality of the country is ranked theworst in the whole world, with 2,054 lives lost per 100,000 births.The country’s basic infrastructure is still poor, with only about400 kilometers of paved roads, while 78 percent lack propersatisfactory (Sharkey, 2015). Despite the fact that one of the areasof focus for foreign aid has been fostering peace, there is still achallenge. The conflicts are still ongoing, resulting in adversehumanitarian crisis, characterized by adverse human rightsviolations, gender-based violence, ethnic targeting, looting, anddestructions, which have only resulted in the overreliance on foreignaid.

Inconclusion, the aim of this paper was to examine the effects of warand peace on foreign aid, focusing on the case of Southern Sudan. Ithas been established that foreign aid has tended to increase withconflict escalation. Although the fund has been serving the intendedobjectives, there are still various socioeconomic issues that call tobe addressed. To a certain extent, the increasing foreign aid hasresulted in dependency, rather than foster resilience.

References

Bradbury,M. (2012). Localpeace process in Sudan: A Baseline.Rift Valley institute.

Branch,A. &amp Mampilly, C. (2015). “Winning the War, but losing peace?The Dilemma of SpLM/A Civil Administration and the task ahead”.Journalof Modern African Studies.43 (1):1-20

Bryden,M. &amp Brickhill, J. (2016). “Disarming Southern Sudan”.Conflictsecurity and Development.10(2): 239-292

Deng,F. (2014). “Sudan: A nation in Tarbulent search for itself”.Annalsof American Political and social science.603: 155-62

Matia,A. (2014). “South Laws Contradict Laws of constitution”. JubaPost.

Sharkey,J. (2015). “Arab Identity and Ideology in Sudan: The Politics ofEthnicity and Race”. Africanaffairs.