The situation in South Sudan seems to be worsening by the day, according to Yasmin Sooka, a chairperson of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan. On March 18th, 2025, Sooka spoke to the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland. According to the transcribed statement on the U.N. Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner website, Sooka claims that South Sudan is at a “critical moment in its transition” plagued with a massive humanitarian crisis fueled by the corruption embedded in the political system.  

Sooka reports that the political competition in South Sudan is intensifying, and the current crisis “threatens to exacerbate the existing humanitarian and human rights crises.” The political situation in South Sudan revolves around two leaders, President Salva Kiir and Vice President Riek Machar. In 2018, they both signed a peace deal, and although it was already fragile, recent developments threatened to undermine it further. Recently, according to Reuters, security forces loyal to Kiir arrested two ministers and several senior military officials allied with Machar. Heavy clashes erupted in Nasir, a key northern town, between national forces and the White Army, a militia primarily composed of Nuer fighters – which is Machar’s ethnic group. Consequently, government forces accuse Machar’s faction of collaborating with the White Army to attack a military garrison, which is a claim Machar’s party denies. Additionally, a South Sudanese general and dozens of soldiers were killed when a U.N. helicopter evacuating them from Nasir was attacked. This signals that even the U.N.’s attempts to mediate, evacuate, and peace-keep are falling short. 

These recent events exacerbated the already tense history between Kiir and Machar. Since South Sudan’s independence in 2011, both figures have been central figures in the nation’s politics. Although they were both rebel leaders in the wars against Sudan, their ideas of what South Sudan should be diverged as Kiir stayed with the Sudan’s People Liberation Movement, and Machar led a breakaway faction. The struggle between the two has been emphasized by ethnic violence between the Dinka (Kiir) and the Nuer (Machar)—the ethnic distrust between the two dates to 1991 when forces backed by Machar massacred Dinka civilians. Peace agreements have been made and broken between Kiir and Machar, and U.N. peacekeeping forces have been deployed to help commit to a stable, inclusive government. Nonetheless, there has been little to no traction as the ethnic and political divisions threaten the stability and democratic transition of South Sudan.  

This conflict in South Sudan highlights the effects of political leaders who fail to prioritize the needs of their constituents. When political leaders constantly defile agreements designed to establish peace, it signals to the rest of the international community their lack of desire to change and develop their nation. Obviously, this concept cannot be pushed on every political leader in South Sudan. However, the persistent power struggle between Kiir and Machar has made it extremely clear that self-preservation and political dominance are prioritized over national unity and progress. International actors, such as the U.N., have sought to mediate and prevent further escalation, but they are met with violence; the deep-seated ethnic and political divisions have proven their efforts insufficient.  

Without an actual, unified push for a genuine and inclusive peace process, South Sudan may be caught in a perpetuating cycle of violence and instability. The process needs to address the root causes of the conflict, emphasizing accountability and the needs of civilians. Superficial agreements and temporary ceasefires fail to work unless political will, institutional reform, and a commitment to justice are prioritized. The international community must remain engaged. Peace is, and always has been, a long process. But one that is worth the time.