God and Man: Religious Divides in the Sudans

            In July of 2011, South Sudan gained independence from Sudan as the result of a 2005 peace deal that officially ended Africa’s longest running civil war. One of the primary reasons for their separation was the existence of severe discrepancies in religious ideologies, namely between the Christian and Islamic factions of the nation. As the world’s newest state, South Sudan is faced with the challenge of achieving and maintaining political stability. Though South Sudan was created as a nation to provide religious freedom from the Islamic rule of the Sudanese government, it would appear that they are facing just as much, if not more, religious and political disarray as their own independent nation as when they were a part of the original Sudan. Nonetheless, I would make the argument that national independence was a viable decision.

            In lieu of recent acts of rebellion within South Sudanese borders, the question has been posed as to whether seeking secession from Sudan was the best move. Fearing eradication or cultural annihilation, South Sudan sought out one of the first state secessions in decades. Ethnic polarization in relation to territorial dynamics provided the context for secessionist tensions, with ethnic anxieties as the key drivers. Having historically served as the subordinate portion of Sudan, discontent due to subordination as the working class in the southern regions had been brewing since its inception as a nation. The situation was exacerbated in 1946 afternorthern and southern Sudan were merged as a cohesive unit, with the majority of power being allocated to the north. Civil war erupted in 1955 before Sudan have even become independent from Britain and continued until the secession of South Sudan in 2011.

In order to demonstrate that state partitioning was, in fact, the most viable option for the non-Islamic population of Sudan, this analysis will provide a comparison of the two nations, incorporating current religious conditions, the effect of the split on domestic political affairs, and the future outlook for each nation. Through such methodology, it will be made clear that the creation of South Sudan was the most beneficial option to non-Islamic persons living within the original Sudan.

Current religious conditions

            Sudan has always been a deeply religious nation, but following the independence of South Sudan, Sudan has evolved to a point where its entire governmental system is based off strictly religious ideology. As of 2013, nearly 97% of the Sudanese population associated themselves with Islamic beliefs, compared to the reported 60% majority of Muslims in 2010 prior to the split.  

Figure 1: Religious Denominations in Sudan 2007.

The veritable elimination of Christianity and traditional African religions has allowed Sudan to establish a dominant state religion that has percolated into every aspect of daily life for the majority of the Sudanese population. Furthermore, the loss of population within the Sudanese borders from 41 million in 2010 to 35 million in 2013 has caused ruling authorities to hold even tighter to governmentally sanctioned Islamic policies to stem the outward flow of their population.

            As for South Sudan, its religious demographics are dominated by Christian followings and traditional African religions, though there are no reliable statistics on the exact denominations due to internal unrest and the unavailability of comprehensive population reports.  However, the acting general of the South Sudan Council of Churches made a statement that the seven principal Christian groups are Roman Catholic, Episcopal,Presbyterian, Sudan Pentecostal, Sudan Interior, Presbyterian Evangelical, and the African Inland Church, and a sizable portion of the population also adheres to a combination of Christian and indigenous beliefs.  Prior to the split, Christians were concentrated in southern Sudan and the Nuba Mountains, composing approximately 5% of the Sudanese population and the 10% of the population subscribing to traditional African religions were scattered throughout the southern rural countryside.  Due to the fact that Sudan was already geographically divided, the referendum in the south for independence in 2011 won 99% of the southern Sudanese vote, creating a new nation of approximately 11 million. ("South Sudan Profile,” 2015) Additionally, it is relevant to note that Arabic is accepted as the national language amongst Islamic Sudan, whereas South Sudan accepts English as its primary language.

Effect of split on domestic affairs

            From 1956 through 2010, Northern Muslims dominated the political and economic systems within Sudan, with the majority of ruling members belonging to the National Congress Party. Though this system proved disadvantageous to persons outside the Islamic faith, it was kept in check by minority opposing parties, namely the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, supported by a majority of southern Christians. However, when this minority party advocating a secular state in full support of religious freedom was lost to South Sudan, Sudan’s internal politics shifted dangerously toward a complete religious monarchy. Sudanese domestic affairs have been challenged by the severe punishments being implemented for the practice of apostasy, the rejection of faith. New policies have legalized the death penalty as an appropriate penance for rejection of the Islamic faith within Sudanese borders. A case that called this system of severe religious persecution to the attention of the international community was in 2014 when a young woman was condemned to death for religious non-conformity, namely abstinence from the Islamic faith. In the deliberation and implementation of religious tolerance policies, religious freedom must be thought of as not only the freedom of religion, but also the freedom from religion Sudan currently subscribes to neither of these clauses regarding religious freedom. However, a study analyzing the outcome of the 2010 election in Sudan indicates that there may be a fundamental shift occurring in the dynamics of the Sudanese party system. Alternative to previous findings, the results suggest a lessening influence of Islamic ideologies on the national government. The author proposes an apparent disappearance of religious-based parties in major politics. Though the study was conducted prior to the split in 2011, it reflects the potential for a political turnaround. Nonetheless, the vast majority of political evaluations of the state of Sudan suggest the alternative: Sudan is suffering as a result of the loss of South Sudan and is turning to religious law in order to achieve stability.

            South Sudan is also experiencing internal conflict due to religion, but for a different reason: whereas Sudan is held under far too rigid religious regulations made possible by a distinct state religion, South Sudan is experiencing conflict between different religious factions. Political analyst Leonard Leo even went so far as to suggest that in terms of religious freedom, the situation in South Sudan is “about as abysmal as it comes.” 

Figure 2: Unrest in South Sudan.

While Sudan holds a moderately stable government for the time being, due in large part to religious restrictions incorporated into national law, South Sudan seems to have condensed all of the previous religious unrest in Sudan into their own borders. Religious extremism is on the rise, and this in correlation with movements such as the Marxist underpinnings of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement is resulting in rapidly debilitating political instability. The nation that sought independence to escape religious injustice has encountered more obstacles than it ever could have imagined. However, it has been found that a positive correlation between population size, ethnic heterogeneity,and state partitions, suggesting that the larger a country and its population, the greater its potential for internal divides. This is actually a positive note for South Sudan as it implies that it will be easier for them than Sudan to attain political congruency within its own borders: it just needs to unify its people into a cohesive nationalist unit. 

Projections for each nation

             "You have a failed state, and you split it into two. What do you get? You get two failed states." This remark from asks Omer Ismail, a senior adviser for the nonprofit Enough project, which aims to end genocide and crimes against humanity, is a gross oversimplification of a complex issue; nonetheless, it is reflective of the opinions of many analysts on the issue. However, I disagree. I am more inclined to subscribe to the prospective ideas presented by John Akec. As opposed to other authorities on the situation in the Sudans who base their predictions off a bloody and turbulent history, he approaches the issue with a forward-thinking viewpoint and the potential for internal development. The author offers up the proposition that the unity-separation model that is currently in place is not the most effective approach to such a complex relationship in their post-independence era and stresses the potential for building a dependent mutualistic relationship between the two. 

            As far as the political conditions in Sudan, they remain uncertain, but the signing of the Sudan Call, a declaration instituted late last year, is aiding in the unification of religious and civil society groups. The outcome remains up in the air, but actions such as this serve to help curb corruption and bad governance through religious exploitation. Though it has been seen in this case that periods of democratization and economic transition impact internal ethnic dynamics, leading to security dilemmas and ultimately secession, this is not entirely a bad thing as it allows a stronger system of government to develop.

            A pertinent theory that may prove useful to South Sudan is John Burton’s human rights theory, which suggests that religious and ethnic groups fight due to a denial of biological and psychological needs for identity, security, recognition, participation, and autonomy. South Sudan’s bloody history due to religious unrest definitely fits the bill for this theory. In order to overcome this internal fighting, South Sudan needs to pursue political unification of its varying Christian denominations, as larger ethnic groups are better able to overcome political dissent, as well as increase the level of social polarization.

            Evidence of developing cordial relations can be seen by the mutual agreement of the two nations to resume cross-border oil flows, grant residency to each other’s’ citizens, and withdraw troops from border areas in March of 2013.

Figure 3: Signing of Sudan-South Sudan Peace Treaty 

Nonetheless, it is important to maintain a realistic viewpoint of the situation and recognize that neither of the Sudans are in any sort of healthy religious or political state and must remain vigilant and proactive towards the pursuit of internal stability.

Conclusion

            In essence, I would conclude that secession from Sudan was the most viable option for the South Sudanese people in terms of religious and political freedom because no previous means of attempted ethnic cohesion had proved successful. North-South tensions go back decades, even before Sudan’s independence in 1956, with deep roots in the ancient and medieval history of the zone. Missionaries converted the region to Christianity in the 6th century, but the influx of Muslim Arabs eventually controlled the area and replaced Christianity with Islam. Since then, religious violence and unrest has been festering within the Sudanese borders. Though unification is often a suggested remedy for internal distress, it can be seen in this case that sometimes secession is the most beneficial option. Many authorities on the issue recognize that the transition to an autonomous nation is going to be a significant struggle, but will ultimately prove to be beneficial to both nations, especially if they can establish a working relationship with each other.