Federalism in Conflict Resolution in Sudan – Calculating Infinity Skip to the content Federalism in Conflict Resolution in Sudan April 18, 2025 admin 0 Comments In an attempt to put an end to the conflicts that prevailed in Sudan for long time, three different peace agreements were signed during the period 2005 – 2007. The first is the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) that ended the north-south armed conflict, the second is the Darfur peace agreement (DPA) which meant to settle the conflict in Darfur region, the third is the East Sudan peace agreement (ESPA) to resolve the conflict in the Eastern part of Sudan. A major pillar of these agreements is the wealth berbagi arrangements (WSA). These WSA provide a model for fair plus equitable distribution of financial resources between the central government plus the states (regions) plus they rely heavily on the principles of fiscal federalism. The adopted system of fiscal arrangement proved to be fairly effective in transferring substantial resources to the concerned states. States transfers akun for about 4% of GDP on average during the period 2005 plus 2007. The system also marked a positive move in strengthening the intergovernmental fiscal relations. There are some obstacles that confront the implementation of this system which might reduce its effectiveness in eradicating the symptoms of conflict. The system depends heavily on the flow of oil revenues which are unpredictable plus exhaustible. The system also is confronted with weak institutional capacity at the state level. Without strong institutional arrangement plus efficient monitoring plus evaluation, poor benefits are going to be achieved out of these resources. There should be robust fiscal reforms mainly in the daerah of expenditure control plus cash management if a sustainable transfer system is going to exist. . Background: The republic of the Sudan is an independent, sovereign state which has a federal system of government in which power is effectively devolved. Responsibilities are distributed between the national plus other levels of government according to the provisions of the constitutions. Since independence in the fifties, Sudan started to suffer internal conflict in the South of Sudan. Conflict also erupted in other regions at latter periods in Eastern of Sudan plus in western of Sudan ( Darfur area) plus in the Nuba mountains (Southern Kordofan). One of the common factors in the eruption of these conflicts is the state of underdevelopment plus the state of discontent among some of the rural communities in these areas. Lack of development plus the poor provision of dasar services inadequate development process were stated as some of the main causes of this armed conflict . Therefore, it became clear to the government that any peace negotiations should address the question of underdevelopment that led to these conflicts. Allocating resources to finance development is a genuine demand from the side of the armed movements plus this demand found support from a wide range of persons plus institutions who took part in the peace negotiations. By combining both political federalism plus fiscal federalism, Sudan started to put in place fiscal arrangements that were supposed to assist in putting an end to these conflicts plus provide direct support to the peace building process. These fiscal arrangements are centered around creating a system of intergovernmental financial transfers whereby the national government transfers financial resources to the government of different states. The state governments take the responsibility of spending these resources to finance development projects plus activities including the provision of dasar services. Categories: Uncategorized Leave a Reply Cancel reply