South Sudan crisis: What if the United Nations reduces its weapons?

Global anxiety is once again changing the South Sudan, the world’s youngest nation.A long -lasting struggle in the East African country has claimed thousands of people. It has also displaced some 2.3 million people and pushed around 60,000 children into malnutrition.International efforts to end conflict include Aunited Nations (UN), which include the transfer of arms for parties for the conflicts ending May 31. Members of the United Nations Security Council have been scheduled to vote on a draft proposal to expand the South Sudan ban regime.According to Amnesty International, the lives of citizens are threatened without arms expansion.“We insist [UN] To renew Ambargo to the Security Council, to implement it and protect civil life, “Tiger Chaguta said, Regional Director of Amnesty for East and Southern Africa.“While the United Nations weapons Ambargo are not a panacea, the condition of human rights would be almost worse without it,” he said.Amnesty has described as an open violation for South Sudan since March 11, 2025 since March 11, 2025 as the deployment of armed Uganda soldiers and military equipment.

Violation of United Nations sanctions

In 2018, the United Nations Security Council imposed a weapon embarrago on South Sudan, and its ban on the country was called on the dates of 2015.On May 30, 2024, the council extended sanctions for a year. Apart from arms embarragos, it also incorporates asset freeze and travel ban.At that time, the United Nations stated that it was open to review arms through amendment, suspension or progressive lifting. In its estimate, arms shipments violated the United Nations resolution to end the struggle and contributed to instability in the country.However, a statement by the International Crisis Group stated that while restrictions “have made it difficult for actors to deploy heavy weapons”, the country’s porous borders are difficult to ban a small weapons and light weapons.In a letter to the United Nations in early 2024, the first vice -president of South Sudan, Reak Machna accused Uganda of “severe violation of arms” after the deployment of his troops in South Sudan.Amnesty’s Crisis Avidens Lab recently verified two videos featuring the Uganda People’s Defense Forces (UPDF) personnel and equipment.Amnesty said, “The first dozens of UPDF soldiers are shown arriving at the Juba International Airport on March 11. The second reflects carriers and military trucks of the armored personnel.”Amidst the reported violations, anxiety is increasing on whether the United Nations can effectively interfere and what can mean renewal of weapons.

Is the United Nations peace?

Recently, the United Nations Security Council extended the mandate of the United Nations Mission at South Sudan for 12 months, expressing “deep concern” over the situation in the country.Amidst these continuous efforts, some citizens are questioning the impact of the peace efforts of the United Nations.“The United Nations is in Juba or other parts of South Sudan. They are there, roaming the streets, but they cannot take an action.”“I don’t believe that their mandate is clear. You cannot say that you are doing peace, what are you having peace? People are fighting every day and you are not doing anything about it.”However, the United Nations insisted that it was doing all this to prevent conflict.“This country has suffered two civil war before its independence and two after its independence. There is no hunger for more pain in the population. They have suffered a lot due to civil war. Therefore, we have to stop the Civil War at whatever cost we have to stop,” said Lieutenant General Mohan Subramanian, Anamis Force Commander.