South Sudan’s political order is built on instability, not peace |
South Sudan’s repeated slide toward the brink of civil war is often explained as a consequence of state weakness, institutional fragility, or unresolved ethnic tensions. These explanations, while partially true, miss the more uncomfortable reality: instability is not merely a failure of governance in South Sudan, but the very mechanism through which the country is ruled. Fourteen years after independence, the world’s youngest state remains trapped in a political order that depends on uncertainty, delay, and managed crisis for its survival. War is not an accident waiting to happen; it is a condition that the system is designed to keep possible, but never fully resolved.
Since gaining independence in 2011, South Sudan has yet to hold a single general election. The promise of democratic transition, enshrined in successive peace agreements, has been postponed again and again. The transitional period has now been extended four times, with elections tentatively scheduled for 2026-though few observers inside or outside the country believe they will take place. A permanent constitution remains unfinished, key security arrangements under the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS) are only partially implemented, and transitional justice mechanisms exist largely on paper. What is often framed as bureaucratic delay or insecurity increasingly looks like deliberate design.
At the heart of this system is a fundamental distinction between formal institutions and real power. On paper, South Sudan has the trappings of a modern state: ministries, courts, a national army, and a parliament. In practice, authority flows through informal networks linking the presidency, senior security figures, control over oil revenues, and ethnic patronage systems. These networks thrive on ambiguity. Clear rules would constrain discretion. Elections would introduce uncertainty. A finalized constitution would freeze power relations that are currently fluid and negotiable. For the ruling elite, instability preserves flexibility-and flexibility preserves survival.
Nowhere is this clearer than in the security sector. South Sudan officially maintains a national army, yet in reality it functions........