More than a decade after gaining independence, South Sudan faces imminent collapse. Political obstruction, armed clashes, and regional meddling are pushing the nation toward all-out war. Despite numerous peace agreements, including the September 2018 Revitalized Peace Agreement, the country remains mired in conflict—not because solutions are lacking, but because its leaders, particularly President Salva Kiir and their regional allies, deliberately obstruct these solutions to preserve power. This impediment, combined with inconsistent U.S. engagement and the growing influence of external actors such as China and Russia, threatens not only South Sudan’s stability but the security and prosperity of the wider East African region. Without decisive, strategic, and sustained international action, the promise of peace in South Sudan will remain unrealized.
The peace agreement was meant to end years of brutal conflict and lay the foundation for stability. Instead, it has become largely symbolic and ineffective. President Salva Kiir has stalled its implementation at every turn, sidelining opposition leaders, delaying critical security reforms, and weakening institutions meant to enforce the peace process and accountability. These are not missteps; they are deliberate tactics designed for political survival.
Kiir’s peace-hindering tactic is not an isolated issue. Uganda, under President Yoweri Museveni, has provided both military support and diplomatic cover, signaling to Kiir that undermining peace carries no real risks. Other neighboring countries, such as Kenya, Sudan, and Ethiopia, have so far proven unable to influence Uganda’s involvement in South Sudan’s internal affairs, further complicating any coordinated solution. The result is a fragile state where peace remains largely theoretical rather than enforced.
The international community should note that Dr. Riek Machar was initially reluctant to go to Juba when the peace agreement was signed, due to security concerns. However, the AU, IGAD, and the wider international community assured him that his safety would be protected under President Kiir’s directive. In effect, they became the guarantors of the revitalized peace accord. It is therefore ironic that the very guarantors who compelled Machar to return to Juba now appear unable or unwilling to use their influence to secure his release from Kiir’s regime.
The question remains whether IGAD, the AU, and the international community betrayed Dr. Riek Machar. Ultimately, the answer is for readers to decide.
Kiir’s regime is adept at exploiting any situation it deems useful for its survival. Days after the March 2025 clashes in Nasir between the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF) and the White Army, which resulted in the death of Lt. Gen. Majur Dak, senior government and military officials began publicly blaming opposition figures. They specifically targeted Dr. Riek Machar, accusing him of responsibility for Gen. Majur’s death. This prompted a crackdown and the arrest of senior SPLM/A-IO officials, including Machar, who was placed under house arrest on March 26, 2025.
Kiir has long sought ways to prevent full implementation of the peace agreement. He appears to view the Nasir clashes as an opportunity to silence opposition leaders, particularly Dr. Machar, whom he considers the only viable threat to his rule. The regime’s stance is clear: any peace deal that would dismantle the current oppressive political system is unacceptable.
Amidst this storm of crises, one question pierces the silence: Does the United States’ overly cautious policy fuel the flames of chaos in South Sudan?
U.S. disengagement has worsened the situation. The United States was once a central player in South Sudan’s independence and early peace efforts. Today, U.S. engagement has become overly cautious and inconsistent with its past policies. Rhetoric has replaced substantive action. Kiir’s government now believes that the U.S., under Trump’s administration, does not care about resolving South Sudan’s conflict.
Since late February 2025, some senior South Sudanese government officials have claimed that no country or individual will pay attention to Kiir’s actions. They have even compared the ongoing joint South Sudan–Uganda deadly bombing campaign in Nuer-majority areas of Upper Nile, Jonglei, and Unity States to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Among them is South Sudan’s Information Minister, Michael Makuei Lueth, who bluntly declared at a March 2025 press conference in Juba that no one will pay attention to or care about the bombings in Nasir County. He added that Palestinian Arabs are killed and bombed by Israel daily, while no international law protects them. Makuei Lueth’s statement implies that Kiir’s regime is like Israel, and the Nuer are like the Palestinians. This statement comes from a national minister, who is expected to address issues with reason and clarity. Unfortunately, justification and glorification of impunity characterize Kiir’s regime.
Unsurprisingly, Kiir also believes that the U.S., under President Donald Trump, is no longer interested in punishing his government because he agreed to Trump’s request, allowing Washington to deport individuals whom it deems dangerous to South Sudan. This move risks undermining U.S. credibility. This seemingly ‘talk tough, do nothing’ approach has created a vacuum that emboldens Kiir, reassures Museveni, and encourages others to conclude that Washington is distracted elsewhere. Meanwhile, Kiir’s cultivation of ties with China has further eroded the once-formidable U.S. leverage over Juba.
The U.S. should abandon the policy of issuing tough rhetoric without taking meaningful action, as it has proven ineffective. This approach, first developed under the Obama administration, often unfairly blames all South Sudanese political leaders for the country’s instability. In reality, Salva Kiir bears primary responsibility for key crises: he is largely responsible for the outbreak of the December 2013 civil war out of fear that the ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) party might remove him from power and systematically obstructed the implementation of the peace agreement. Under his leadership, corruption, human rights abuses, and weak governance persisted. Treating all leaders as equally culpable reflects a flawed moral equivalence. Washington must reconsider its strategy toward South Sudan if it hopes to maintain credibility with the country’s suffering population.
It is striking that Washington’s early inaction has allowed Beijing to dominate South Sudan’s oil sector and tighten its economic grip on Juba. Russia, meanwhile, is aggressively establishing itself across Africa, providing security and diplomatic cover to brutal regimes like Kiir’s. It appears that current U.S. policy is ineffective; in fact, it reinforces China’s influence and shifts the balance of power in East Africa in potentially irreversible ways.
The cost of continued inaction will be catastrophic. South Sudan is sliding back into civil war, and its collapse would not be confined to its borders. Instability risks spreading into neighboring countries—including Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic—disrupting humanitarian corridors, increasing the risk of famine, and threatening millions of lives.
But the stakes go far beyond a humanitarian disaster. If the United States persists with its current inconsistent approach, China or another global power like Russia will seize the opportunity to strengthen its influence in South Sudan. American credibility on democracy, sovereignty, human rights, and international norms would erode further. Silence or inaction is not a neutral stance; it emboldens dictatorships, fuels regional interference, and deepens the suffering of the South Sudanese people.
The United States still possesses the diplomatic, financial, and strategic tools necessary to reverse this trajectory. To regain its influence, Washington must adopt a new policy approach and reassess its bilateral relations with Kampala. Overreliance on Uganda has proven a strategic misstep. The U.S. should strengthen ties with other East African countries to counter Uganda’s involvement in South Sudan’s crisis. Targeted sanctions, including asset freezes and travel bans, should be imposed on individuals and entities obstructing progress, including elements of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces (UPDF). Coordination with the African Union (AU), the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the European Union (EU), and the United Nations (UN) is essential to curtail Uganda’s interference. Simultaneously, the United States should bolster UN peacekeeping forces in South Sudan, prioritize support for local civil society organizations, and encourage independent peace monitoring alongside hybrid accountability mechanisms.
None of this can succeed without a new strategy and a reassertion of the U.S. role in South Sudan’s peace process. If Washington elevates South Sudan on its foreign policy agenda, deploys high-level diplomacy, and makes clear that disengagement is over, it can send a strong message to Juba that lasting peace for the people of South Sudan is essential and that obstruction will no longer be tolerated. Preventing South Sudan from descending into chaos is both a strategic necessity and a moral responsibility for the United States.
However, time is not on Washington’s side. Every delay empowers those who undermine peace and deepens the grip of external actors who work tirelessly against the cause of peace. Kiir is counting on U.S. inaction, Museveni is exploiting it, and China and Russia are cementing their influence in South Sudan.
If Kiir continues to deliberately obstruct peace, shielded by regional complicity and inconsistent international engagement, can the United States and its allies remain passive? A nation they helped bring into existence now teeters on the brink of collapse—risking not only a humanitarian catastrophe but also global credibility and regional stability.
South Sudan stands at a critical juncture. Every delay in implementing the 2018 peace agreement strengthens those who benefit from chaos, deepens external influence, and erodes public faith in governance. The United States, along with its international partners, must act decisively, reassert diplomatic leadership, enforce accountability, and support regional cooperation to ensure that obstruction of peace is no longer tolerated. The stakes are immense: failure to act risks renewed civil war, humanitarian disaster, regional instability, and diminished U.S. credibility. Conversely, timely and strategic engagement can secure a pathway to lasting peace, safeguard millions of lives, and affirm the international community’s commitment to justice and stability in one of Africa’s most strategically vital nations.
The writer, Duop Chak Wuol, is an analyst, writer, and former editor-in-chief of the South Sudan News Agency. A graduate of the University of Colorado, he specializes in security and geopolitics in South Sudan and the broader East African region. His work has appeared in respected local, regional, and international outlets, including AllAfrica, Radio Tamazuj, The Independent (Uganda), The Arab Weekly, The Standard (Kenya), The Chronicle (Ghana), Sudan Tribune, and Addis Standard (Ethiopia), among others. In August 2017, the Ethiopian Broadcasting Corporation (EBC) featured him following the publication of his article, “Prime Minister Meles Zenawi: An African Icon Gone Too Soon,” which praised the late Ethiopian leader’s pivotal role in driving the nation’s economic transformation. He can be reached at duop282@gmail.com.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.