What Actually Happened
Recognizing the deteriorating situation, the UN Security Council voted in May 2014 to revise the mandate of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). The Council decided on authorizing peacekeepers to protect civilians, assist in the delivery of humanitarian aid, actively prevent violence, and monitor human rights violations. Crucially, the revised mandate allowed UNMISS personnel to use greater force to achieve its mandate. For the moment, the force’s size remained at the 12,500-troop ceiling that had been set earlier in the year.
Despite its revised mandate, UNMISS struggled to have significant influence on the trajectory of the conflict. South Sudan’s civil war would continue to rage for more than five years after its outbreak. Peace talks continued on and off but fighting often resumed after each round of meetings. In August 2015, IGAD successfully mediated a cease-fire agreement signed by both parties. However, the cease-fire was shattered in July 2016 and Kiir- and Machar-aligned forces resumed fighting once more.
The renewed violence that year prevented farmers from planting or harvesting crops, causing severe food shortages in the country. In July 2014, the UN Security Council declared South Sudan’s food crisis the “worst in the world.” In February 2017, the United Nations and some government agencies declared famine in parts of the country, with nearly five million people at risk from food insecurity. Food insecurity has continued and even worsened to this day. In 2023, more than 7.7 million people, or two-thirds of the population, faced severe food insecurity—the worst hunger crisis the country has ever faced.
The resurgence in violence in 2016 drew criticism of UNMISS for being ill-prepared to fulfill its mandate. Consequently, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon dismissed the commander of the UN peacekeeping force over his failure to adequately protect civilians. The next month, the Security Council authorized the deployment of an additional four thousand peacekeepers to UNMISS. This raised the total number of Peacekeepers to 17,000. However, the deployment of the force was delayed until May 2017 due to the South Sudanese government’s reluctance to allow them in the country.
In June 2018, the UN Security Council passed an arms embargo on South Sudan aimed at cutting the supply of weapons to both parties. Under increasing international pressure to negotiate, Kiir and Machar met for the first time since 2016 and signed an IGAD-brokered peace deal. The meeting resulted in a power-sharing agreement in which Machar would return as vice president. The revitalized peace agreement reduced violence in many regions of South Sudan. It also improved the ability of humanitarian groups to supply aid. South Sudan made economic improvements by resuming its stalled oil production.
The peace process moved slowly. It took nearly two years for the country to successfully form a unity government. Important components of the peace agreement, such as appointments to state governorships, were even slower to be implemented, and remained as potential sources of continued tension. Observers have expressed skepticism about the durability of this agreement and stress that—despite the progress toward peace—South Sudan’s humanitarian crisis has yet to abate. Accordingly, UNMISS remains in the country to help support the durability of the peace deal. Reductions in violence have enabled the force to focus more of its efforts on ensuring access to humanitarian aid and monitoring adherence to the peace deal.
Many analysts have criticized the United Nations for not responding swiftly and robustly enough to address the crisis in South Sudan. Many highlight high profile failures in peacekeeping, such as the inability of UNMISS forces to cope with the outbreak of violence in Juba in 2016. Others have criticized the UN Security Council’s slow decision making on matters such as the arms embargo; the idea had been on the table since 2016, but only passed two years later. At that point, critics argued that the embargo had come too late to have a serious effect and risked jeopardizing peace negotiations.
Still, fully evaluating the success of the United Nations response to the civil war in South Sudan is difficult. Many have defended UNMISS, arguing that despite its challenges, the operation saved potentially hundreds of thousands of lives. South Sudanese civilians have claimed that, “without UNMISS there would have been a genocide.”
Ultimately, observers worry that the current peace in South Sudan is not guaranteed to last. Many of the tensions that fueled civil war in South Sudan remain, and instability elsewhere in the region could spread or divert international resources and attention away from South Sudan. Should the current peace break down into renewed civil war in the future, the UN Security Council could once more face a decision of whether and how to step in.