50 years in the making

In 1955, Sudan belonged to the Ottoman Empire with Egypt and Great Britain responsible for governing the North, while the South belonged to the colony "British East Africa."

The North was developing its own administration, while the South was basically left to itself by the British.

"The state power at the time always focused on the Nile delta area," says Elke Grawert, Sudan expert from the conversion center in Bonn. "Investments were mainly made in the North." While this area started flourishing, the people in the South were still working as peasants and herdsmen and were therefore economically inferior to the North, she says.

The Addis Ababa agreement

The people living in South Sudan feared they would be treated as second-class citizens once they become independent. This fear triggered the first Sudan War which started in 1955 as soldiers of the South mutinied because they did not want to work under Northern officers.

The struggles went on for almost 20 years until finally, in 1972, the Peace Treaty of Addis Abeba was signed, granting political independence and a government to the South.

However, the agreement did not last for very long, "mainly due to the fact that the North kept intervening in the political life of the South," says Alfred Lokuji, historian and professor at the University of Juba in South Sudan.

In 1983, the Southern autonomy was terminated by the North Sudanese military ruler Gaafar Numeiri, who also introduced the sharia, the religious law of Islam. Experts say these steps had something to do with the fact that large amounts of oil were found in South Sudan at the time.

A 'New Sudan'

However, the South Sudanese started to protest again. A new rebel group called Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) was founded by former army officer John Garang.

Interestingly, the SPLA rebels did not want South Sudan to become independent but they wanted to fight for the creation of what they called a "New Sudan," a unified state of North and South.

According to Alfred Lokuji, not everyone in the population liked this idea of a secular state with "no preference for any religion and no state religion."

The historian thinks that this idea and the notion of Africans and Arabs living together in one unified state was just too intellectual for the majority of the population since "most of the people simply were very angry that the Addis Ababa agreement was dissolved and they on their own concluded that the best thing was to actually fight for independence."

Finally, in 2005, a peace treaty was signed between the SPLA and the North Sudanese government and former president Omar al-Bashir promised to "divide the country's wealth equally and with care."

Both parties agreed on an autonomy declaration of the South plus an additional unitary government for the whole state in Khartum, consisting of the SPLA (by now called Sudan People's Liberation Movement, SPLM) and the North Sudanese governing party, the National Congress Party (NCP).

John Garang became vice president of this transition government which was supposed to be in power for the next six years. A referendum was scheduled for early 2011, in which it was to be decided whether the state was to remain as one or to be separated.

Shortly after the talks, John Garang died, his successor Salva Kiir pushed for the South's independence and his efforts left their mark. In February 2011 the results of the referendum spoke for themselves - almost 98 percent of the South Sudanese voted for an independent Southern Sudan, providing Africa with its 54th state.

Independent - and better?

The SPLM is still governing the country up to this point. To experts, it remains unclear if the rebel group will manage to become a democratic party that also respects other opinions and ideas. For most people independence of the South should mean a better life and a secure future. However, the living conditions in South Sudan have not significantly improved.

Half of the population lives below the poverty line, more than 70 percent are analphabets and 80 percent do not have access to sanitary facilities, showing that Omar al-Bashir's promises have not been kept after all. According to Elke Grawert the two governments are not the only ones to blame but also "the international aid organisations that did not put their main focus on socio-economic development in Sudan."

Author: Daniel Pelz/aw
Editor: Rob Mudge