I always thought, even from the beginning, because I was here before the CPA was signed, that there was a very good chance that we could see all the way through the CPA, and the consequence of the Referendum, and quite frankly a likely independence for south Sudan. So I have not been surprised
DAVID GRESSLEY has been synonymous with the UN. The UN Regional Coordinator for south Sudan as well as head of UN the Mission in Sudan, is, perhaps, the longest serving senior UN official here, having been here during the civil war. In a conversation with BADRU MULUMBA, Gressley looks back at the milestones on the road to the birth of a new Republic:–
Q. You have been here longer than many outsiders. When you first came did you ever think we would come this far?
I always thought, even from the beginning, because I was here before the CPA (Sudan’s Comprehensive Peace Agreement) was signed, that there was a very good chance that we could see all the way through the CPA, and the consequence of the Referendum, and, quite frankly, a likely independence for south Sudan. So, I have not been surprised by the events and, in the discussions I have had over the years, this is what I advised the people was the likely outcome.
Q. In 2009, you said the situation had drastically improved. You gave the example that when the Mission had just been established, you would evacuate staff from the field every week because of insecurity. We had skirmishes here and there this year. Is the success stalling?
No. I think, overall, the trend line is still positive. If you look at the last six and half years during the CPA period, it’s too far better today than in 2005 when there were 25, 26 other armed groups unintegrated, road systems collapsed, infrastructure gone, kids not in school – it was a horrible situation. Things have obviously improved over time.
There were ups and downs and some bad days. And there would probably be some difficult days ahead as well. If we are to look at the overall trend, and while we have had an upsurge in violence in February to April this year, that has started to come down in most areas.
We are seeing in Jonglei state that the Murle and Lou Nuer are a problem again with cattle raiding and retaliation. There are challenges like that that would remain. But overall, the south is reasonably united as it starts to become an independent state.
Q. When you look at the nature of the conflicts here, are they south Sudan specific or is there an example we can borrow from in crafting a solution that works?
I find Sudan and particularly South Sudan to be unique, in my own experience. And it has taken me sometime to understand the dynamics here, the history, the cultural aspects of what we see here in terms of conflict. It’s very, in my experience, unique. And, therefore, a south Sudan specific solution is required. Ultimately, this will have to come from the people and the leadership itself. From our point of view the next several years is a very important period. It’s important that promises made of inclusive government be kept.
It’s important that the process of the final constitution is inclusive, and the constitution developed reflects the dynamics of south Sudan, and that the elections held be free and fair with sufficient political space and freedom of press for appropriate elections to take place. If all those dynamics are in place over the next several years, south Sudan has every prospect of being a stable country in the medium to long term.
If there is faltering over the next several years, it could reopen divisions that we have seen in the past and cause conflict and deeper problems. It’s a very important period; very important work needs to be done by leadership, political groups here, supported by international community.
Q. We’re heading into a new country. Is there still space for the UNMIS?
The Security Council is yet to pass a resolution mandating a new mission. So I can’t give you a definite answer. Currently, it’s referred to, in terms of discussions, as the UN mission in South Sudan. I guess you would pronounce it as the current one, but reflecting only south Sudan.
Q. Will UNMIS continue in the north?
There will be a mission in Abyei. In the absence of any further resolutions by the Security Council, the missions outside of southern Sudan will be liquidated.
Q. What have been your successes?
One of the earlier successes was support given to the ceasefire joint committee, which monitored the disengagement of forces, that monitored, particularly, the removal of SAF forces back to the north. That was an extraordinary important landmark, achieved by early 2008. The support to the census, elections, particularly the Referendum, made it happen on time and to be as credible as possible, which it was. One can’t talk about the referendum without talking about how well it went with participation of south Sudanese. I don’t want to detract from that. But I think the logistical support, the technical support that the UN provided was vital to achieving that singular political milestone. We have invested a great deal of funding, over six years, easily over US 200 or 250m in supporting demining, which has opened up 14000 km of road, and is now going into extensive land clearance. That’s a significant achievement.
The early achievement, I think, was the opening up of the road coming to Juba. In 2005 you couldn’t drive to Juba from anywhere in southern Sudan. It was a major achievement.
We had earlier successes with DDR, but they have been limited by reintegration issues. We trained thousands of police over the years. We have 460 police officers working on training. There were moments of crisis. You remember Malakal, 2006, Malakal again in 2009 –very bad situation. I think we played a good role as an intermediary to di-escalate the situation and restore normalcy.
Q. UNMIS has had a love-hate relationship with government and the people, facing criticism a lot of the time
I think in general, in south Sudan, we have enjoyed good relations with government. We have had disagreements from time to time. That’s natural in any kind of relationship. But generally we have had a very good working relationship. The government has been accessible and open. They often value our advice, but they don’t always take it; of course, it’s an independent government and we are here to provide good offices. From that point, it’s not surprising from time to time to hear voices of criticism. We take those voices seriously when we hear them and we sit down to try and talk it out.
We can’t always satisfy everyone. We have a mandate from the Security Council. We have resources from the Security Council – Sometimes you can’t satisfy everyone, and we try to advise government accordingly. But to the degree that we can and could, we have tried to work with this government to support efforts to rebuild the country.
Q. In other words, people don’t generally understand the UNMIS mandate.
Peacekeeping is generally misunderstood. It’s not peace enforcement. And the peacekeeping is based upon two parties having agreed to implement some sort of agreement, this time the CPA, and it depends on their good will to continue to implement that. Our role is entirely to monitor and to report on violations, and to work with the parties to overcome those violations. But we are not really there as a military force to enforce peace. We have a limited protection of civilians mandate that allows us to intervene were we are able to do so.
But, in the larger sense, the armed forces of the two armies are far in excess of our own and any expectation that we could, somehow, stop one or the other is really misplaced. We are simply providing neutral offices to support both sides to implement the agreement as they said they would.
Q. Taking you back to DDR, a Harvard Professor, Calestous Juma, just wrote that instead of South Sudan demobilizing soldiers, we could keep the army intact and re-orient it for development, such as building schools, hospitals.
Any DDR has to take into account the reintegration aspects. One, to recognize the contribution of those who fought during the war in a meaningful way. And, secondly, to ensure that they become financially viable after demobilization or for a period leading up to demobilization. If you don’t, then you risk having only those who know how to use weapons as a profession frustrated by not being incorporated in the economy and thus becoming a security threat. If DDR, particularly, the reintegration part is not done well then you risk a serious security problem in the country. Ideas like this are interesting because they offset that kind of concern and can be considered as a possible approach as well.
Q. Looking back, are there somethings you could have done differently?
There are always things like that as you reflect back.
But I think a few of the things we did right was getting in very fast. We were on the ground on January 10, 2005. I personally was with the UN country team. We worked from the beginning inside southern Sudan. I think that was an important step. Along the way we were there as the government started to emerge in July 2005. And I think we have been able to walk the walk with the new government here.
Along the way, yes, of course. looking back, may be we could have done things differently with the different Trust funds. But often you don’t know these things until you get on the ground and start to deal with it. It’s useful to reflect a little bit so that you learn the next time.
But the most important thing is to get on the ground, get on with it, and learn as you go along to try to figure out how to do it better. If you wait to come up with a perfect plan, that has its own price: you may never get anything done.
Q. You have been around for a long time that, at one point, UN was synonymous with David Gressley. We see you, hear you over the radio, and we ask: Who is David Gressely, and why South Sudan for him?
Well, I was actually called in the middle of the night in the US. I was working in India and I got a call at 4 O’clock in the morning, while asleep, asking me if I wanted to come to southern Sudan to be the Operation Lifeline Sudan coordinator.
They thought I was in India, so they called me at that time (It was daytime in India at that time -ed).
I was half-asleep when I accepted the job, went back to sleep, and then I woke up and I wasn’t sure if I had dreamed this or if it was real. It proved to be very real.
I come from a UNICEF background. I have worked here, on the continent, for about 25 years, a lot of that with UNICEF. I came in as the head of Operation Lifeline Sudan, which was led by UNICEF. So that’s how I made my entry.
Q. That’s a very long time working on the same continent
Even my children have been here. My older son came in 2006. He worked with IOM, here in Juba and in Wau. He was actually one of the very first people to drive down to the Nimule area after the withdrawal of the LRA from that area. My second son came in 2007. He worked with NGOs here for a number of months. My daughter came this last year – just after she turned 18. She worked with an NGO called BRAC. She had a fantastic time. She’s now studying hotel resort management and setting her designs for a resort in South Sudan. They are all passionate about South Sudan.
Q. Africa runs in the family, then
Very much so.
