Humanitarian Impact of Continued Restrictions
South Sudan’s ambassador to the United Nations, Cecilia Adeng, appealed during the UN General Assembly for the immediate removal of international sanctions imposed on the country, arguing they hinder peace efforts and humanitarian access. Speaking at the annual gathering of world leaders in New York, Adeng emphasized that the sanctions, originally introduced due to conflict and human rights concerns, now impede national recovery and development. She called for a reassessment of measures that, in her view, disproportionately affect civilians while failing to pressure those responsible for violence.
The sanctions in question include arms embargoes, travel bans, and asset freezes targeting individuals and entities linked to South Sudan’s civil war, which erupted in 2013 and has caused widespread displacement and famine. Although a revitalized peace agreement was signed in 2018, implementation has been uneven, with sporadic violence persisting in several regions. Adeng argued that lifting sanctions would enable the government to access frozen funds, rebuild infrastructure, and support essential services like health and education. She also noted that continued restrictions discourage foreign investment and complicate efforts to unify the country’s fragmented armed forces.
Should Sanctions Be Tied to Peace Progress?
Adeng highlighted how sanctions obstruct the delivery of aid, particularly in hard-to-reach areas where insecurity and bureaucratic hurdles already limit access. She explained that frozen assets prevent the government from purchasing fuel, medicine, and spare parts for water pumps, worsening conditions for millions dependent on humanitarian assistance. According to UN estimates, over 9 million people in South Sudan face acute food insecurity, and sanctions, she claimed, slow the response. Adeng urged the Security Council to distinguish between punitive measures and policies that protect vulnerable populations, insisting that humanitarian exemptions are insufficient without broader relief.
The ambassador questioned whether the current sanctions regime effectively promotes accountability or merely prolongs suffering. She pointed out that while some leaders remain under individual sanctions, the broader economic measures affect entire communities. Adeng suggested a conditional approach, where sanctions are gradually lifted as benchmarks in the peace process—such as unified military command and transitional justice mechanisms—are met. This, she argued, would create incentives for compliance without abandoning pressure on spoilers of peace. Her remarks reflect growing debate within UN circles about the efficacy of broad sanctions in fragile states.
Why does South Sudan want sanctions lifted? South Sudan argues that sanctions hinder economic recovery, restrict access to essential goods, and impede peace implementation by affecting state capacity and humanitarian operations.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Cecilia Adeng? Cecilia Adeng is South Sudan’s permanent representative to the United Nations, responsible for presenting the country’s position in UN forums including the General Assembly and Security Council.
What sanctions are currently in place on South Sudan? The measures include an arms embargo, travel bans, and asset freezes on individuals and entities deemed to threaten peace, imposed following the outbreak of civil war in 2013.