In March 2022, violent conflicts between agricultural communities and livestock herders broke out in Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan. It was the latest episode in months of cattle-related violence in the area, which is in the country’s southern region.
Dinka Bor herders from the adjacent Jonglei State were forced south into Eastern Equatoria’s Magwi County when floods inundated grazing pastures. In only days, though, farmer-herder strife displaced more than 14,000 people.
The Equatoria area hosts South Sudan’s capital, Juba. It is populated by more than 30 distinct ethnic groups, most of them farmers. It was the genesis of the southern insurgency against Sudan’s Khartoum. Economically, it is the strongest area in South Sudan, with tremendous agricultural potential.
However, the militarization of cattle raiding during the 1990s has led to periodic outbursts of violence. These incursions were previously supervised by cultural authorities. But political leaders have armed ethnic groups to achieve their interests, resulting to a proliferation of weapons throughout the area.
Today, the presence of Dinka herders in Equatoria is utilized to reflect historical and ideological conflicts over state structure and identities in South Sudan.
As a consequence, what appeared to be local, inter-communal violence between agricultural host villages and displaced herders in March led to intense national discussion. The Equatoria caucus in South Sudan’s Transitional National Legislative Assembly held a joint news conference to denounce the Magwi assaults.
The emphasis attributed to the Magwi war may be regarded as the product of incompatible conceptions of the state by Equatorian and Dinka elites in South Sudan. My Ph.D. study on Equatorian political identity explains how these views arose.
More than an administrative entity, Equatoria is a context-dependent notion. It is, foremost, a fragile, incomplete political identity. It is used as an umbrella phrase to seek to reconcile various political elites stemming from the colonial-era Equatoria province.
Equatorian leaders have been pressing for greater autonomy to handle their own affairs. Its leaders feel ignored at the national level, which is highly biased towards the major Dinka and Nuer ethnic groups.
Unlike the establishment of a Kalenjin political identity in Kenya, the Equatorian political identity has struggled to become a reality. It has a poor popular basis and no political party. Its more renowned leaders have been co-opted into government.
Second, for many regional elites in Juba, the word Equatoria signifies a political project: federalism. These elites aspire to establish political space for their area under the power-sharing arrangement between Dinka and Nuer elites.
This was not always a priority for them.
Equatoria as a political identity evolved in the 1970s as a result of the perceived political marginalization of its elites. Members of this group have previously described themselves first as South Sudanese. They advocated unity as long as they were in power.
However, they started to warn of a developing Dinka nationalism after Abel Aleir was named leader of the autonomous territory of Southern Sudan in 1972.
Equatoria as an identity of resistance gained strength with the ethnicization of politics in the 1970s. The presence of Dinka cattle herders in the largely agrarian area became the conduit through which political issues were voiced.
The Kokora system – the separation of Southern Sudan into three provinces at the request of Equatorian elites in 1983 – was largely a tactic to evict the Dinka and their livestock from Equatoria.
My interviews in Juba indicated that the battle against Khartoum – which was initiated by the Sudan People’s Liberation Struggle in 1983 – is still regarded largely as an anti-Equatoria movement headed by Dinkas, rather than as a liberation movement. As a consequence, among Equatorian elites, the history of emancipation and the origins of South Sudanese identity are challenged.
Following power-sharing deals in 2015 and 2018 after years of fighting, Dinka and Nuer leaders split important political roles mostly among themselves.
The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement has particularly highlighted significance of ‘South Sudan-ness’ to build a feeling of national unity. Claims for institutional and political autonomy from the central state are considered as challenges to the nascent state.
While Equatorian have been speaking about regionalism, the liberation struggle has called it “localism” to stress how contradictory to the notion of country it is.
Yet Equatorian have always felt sidelined inside the South Sudanese political structure. They have also been criticized for seeking to split the nation.
Additionally, an abortive effort to create an alliance with the Nuer in 2016 and construct a federal government gave rise to extreme Equatorian forces advocating for independence.
This conversation is partly performative in the sense that Equatorial people’s ultimate desire is not to construct their own state, but rather to be accommodated within current organizations. Yet, calls for federalism are rising. Equatorian elites present it as the only system that might free them from what they regard as Dinka dominance.
As a consequence, Equatorian elites have utilized cross-border cattle-related violence to argue for a tightening of internal borders. It has also been used to challenge centralized power.
The protection of Equatorian farmers provides a much-needed uniting cause for a grouping split by internal debates on whether to collaborate with the government or not.
The government has also been accused of arming herders to target groups who are less likely to support its policies. This is becoming increasingly widespread as politicians get ready for probable elections in 2023.
The Equatorian political identity draws on existing fault lines of culture and historical memory. If the sense of marginalization remains, however, a powerful movement might develop in a society with separatist ambitions. This might undermine attempts to stabilize the world’s youngest country.
{theconversation}
