Embargo overdue

SINCE the founding of South Sudan five years ago, its citizens have gone from a brief moment of exhilaration and promise to the cruel reality of tribal violence, depredation and despair.

Their leaders have failed them, and so has the UN Security Council, which is once again scrambling for a solution to end rampant killing and other abuses. One move the council could make immediately is to impose a long-overdue embargo on arms shipments, especially to the government forces that have been largely responsible for the bloodshed.

The present crisis, in which at least 73 civilians have died, began last month when fighting broke out in Juba, the capital, ending the latest in a series of brief ceasefires in a civil war between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and those backing Riek Machar.

On Sunday, the US proposed that the security council authorise an additional 4 000 peacekeepers to secure Juba, the airport and other key facilities. The resolution also calls for an arms embargo if the government does not co-operate with the expanded peacekeeping force.

The Security Council has threatened several times in the past 18 months to block arms shipments without making good on the threat.

And the Obama administration, apparently fearful of losing leverage with Kiir, has refused to cut off the arms flow. While such a ban would affect both sides, experts believe it would have more impact on the government, the only side with heavy weapons. It could actually get Kiir’s attention.