Exhibit poster

[Montréal, Québec, Canada 17°C] Southern Sudan was a place I had not heard much about before my seven-week visit to the East African region of the continent’s largest country. It is a part of Sudan where over eight million people are now recovering from a 21-year civil war that ended six years ago after the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed. The southern rebels fought Sudan’s army and its militias for a generation, trying to bring freedom to the south and end the military junta’s systematic repression of the Nilotic South. The war devastated the land and its people, leaving two million dead, four million internally displaced and one million refugees.

I arrived in Juba on February 26, 2009 during the dry season and met with temperatures that reached 45°C in the shade. I visited mine fields being cleared around the southern capital and observed mine risk education projects in villages still waiting for de-mining teams to remove the hidden danger. Farmers are still reluctent to till the land for fear of stepping on landmines that continue to kill and maim.

I flew to Aweil and visited dozens small villages in Northern Bahr el Ghazal. Here, people are returning to the homeland they ran from when they were attacked with a cruelty more recently witnessed in neighbouring Darfur. I interviewed men, women and children under their villages’ biggest trees. Here, up to 90% of the population have returned in the previous two years after living in displacement camps for ten, fifteen, even twenty years. They arrived without enough wells to supply drinking water, without sufficent schools, without clinics. They are finally on land that is theirs and want to stay, despite the hardships.

In the state of Warrap, I accompanied a vaccination program to the village of Lurcuk. Two medical assistants spent five hours giving innoculations against measles, tuberculosis, polio, diphtheria and tetanus. In all, 276 children were vaccinated.

Later, before my flight back to Montréal, I revisited the youth from Sud Academy, a school for Sudanese refugees in Nairobi, Kenya. I met them before my journey to Sudan and promised to return with images of their homeland, a place they barely remember and dream of returning. Most of them haven’t seen their parents or siblings since they ran from their villages, scrambling to escape the killing.

The photographs represent some of the people I met and who generously shared their stories.

The vernissage is Thursday, June 10 from 16h00-19h00 at Café Rico 969, rue Rachel est, Montréal. Videos I took during my visit will be shown at the vernissage.

Inside a Sud Academy classroom where students look attentively at the video footage I took during my visit to South Sudan (March 2009).

UNMAO's Mark Argent and I at mine removal site outside of Juba near E. Rejaf. Notice the MineWolf in upper left of photo. (March 2009)

[Montréal, Québec, Canada -2°C] In a previous post from Juba, Southern Sudan, I wrote about a UNICEF managed and CIDA-funded Mine Risk Education (MRE) programs. I visited program sites where local NGOs taught children and their elders about landmines that remain hidden near their villages. At the time, there were still more known minefields to clear than there were teams trained to clear them so the clearing process would take time. In the meantime, villagers are taught how to recognize landmines or unexploded ordnances and avoid them to remain safe until the dangers are cleared by the United Nations Mine Action Office (UNMAO).

A few days after an MRE visit, Mark Argent (UNMAO) brought me to a different site outside of Juba in E. Rejaf where landmines were actively being cleared by a team of trained mine-removal personnel and a MineWolf machine that, to me, resembles a snow blower. We drove 100 metres past the minefield to a demarkated area adjacent to where landmines were being cleared. This safe area is outlined by a boundary of white-tipped sticks, within which the mine-removal teams prepare their equipment before entering the minefield, take breaks, debrief and where the UN ambulance vehicle parkes at the ready in case of injury.

MineWolf clearing minefiled near Juba, Southern Sudan. (March 2009)

After my debriefing, I was given protection gear to wear (see above photo) that I put on before heading toward the minefield where a team of de-miners were at work. In the back of the minefield, there was a MineWolf actively pounding at the earth, destroying the landmines hidden below the surface.

With minefields still dotting the landscape, farmers are afraid to cultivate the land. When the MineWolf passes over a minefield, it crushes the mines rendering them obsolete. Rarely do the mines explode during this process and when they do, the machine’s driver is rarely hurt due to its design but the machine gets damaged. Once it has passed over an entire field, the MineWolf is transferred to another minefield. At this point, mine-removal teams begin their meticulous work often accompanied with dogs trained to smell explosives.

Safe area is marked by white-tipped sticks planted in the ground to demarkate the area near Juba. (March 2009)

Safe area is marked by white-tipped sticks planted in the ground to demarkate the area near Juba. (March 2009)

Since 2002/2003, landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW) have killed or maimed at least 4,119 people in Southern Sudan. During my visit I saw a map in the UNMAO offices that showed a list of over 100 known sites needing to be cleared of landmines. During the rpevious year’s de-mining season, which takes place during the dry season from October to May/June, UNMAO cleared 79 routes and 59 areas. Detecting mines along a road takes time. The slow arduous process moves forward at a spead of about four kilometres per day with a special vehicle that has a pulling mine detector.

Mine removal team returns to safe area after a day's work near Juba, southern Sudan (March 2009)

The presence of landmines in post-war Southern Sudan continue to have a serious impact on the South’s ability to develop. Landmines cause road closures, obstruct aid delivery, hinders the return of refugees and prevents farmers from cultivating the land.

In a recently published article, Norweigan People’s Aid presents the Mokindi and Kulipapa communities, located south of Juba, Southern Sudan and their return to cultivation after the land around their village was cleared of landmines. A total of 109 anti vehicle mines, 411 anti personnel mines, 418 Unexploded Ordnance and 28 sub munitions were cleared.

The material presented in the report comes from workshops in Malakal, Juba, Bor and Khartoum in May and June 2009, just after my own visit to Southern Sudan, although I went to Juba, Wau, Aweil and Abyei. Information comes from input during the workshops by local and international NGOs, faith group, politicians, government officials, civil society organizations and “others”.

The report defines four scenarios based on two uncertainties: 1) whether the country will be at war or at peace, and 2) whether the country will remain united or whether the south will secede from the north (see diagram below).

FOUR (five) SCENARIOS:

In the document’s executive summary, five main findings arose from the exercise of creating these four scenarios:

1. “It may not be wise to direct all long-term attention to developmental rather than humanitarian assistance.” because, the report stipulates, even in the best scenario (self-professed as the ‘CPA Hurray!’ scenario) “small-scale conflicts are still likely.”;
2. The ‘CPA Hurray!’ scenario is worth pursuing as a strategy because it “promises a less violent future.” But, according to this report (and this recent report), it “appears less plausible”.
3. The materialization of “free and fair elections is essential, not only to guarantee peace, but as the only peaceful way to bring about unity,” which according to September 2007 focus group survey, A Place to Call Their Own, as well as the report’s own southern focus groups, most Southerners do not want.
4. “Continuous outside mediation and pressure is needed to get all parties to implement the CPA and to make unity attractive.” It continues to explain that the “time horizon” needs more flexibility and needs to be extended beyond 2012. The need to talk about a “post-2012 period” is paramount particularly “about what unity might look like” to make the pre-2012 period “more manageable.”
5. “The critical difference between a successful and unsuccessful outcome will be to a large extent determined by whether the South has a stable, cooperative and confident leadership.”

The interesting future histories in Sudan between 2009-2012, created by the report’s author, lead to each of the four post-2012 Sudan scenarios are followed by the suggestions and policy options for the international community. They are well researched and seem to portray the current situation in Southern Sudan. Future histories are then formulated to create each of the four scenarios.

Based on the five main findings outlined above, the report seems to favour scenario #3, which represents the point of view of Northern focus groups, who view ‘CPA Hurray!’ as “a romantic but possible scenario.” The members of Southern focus groups expressed a belief that “a renewed war between the North and the South next to unavoidable” so scenarios one and two were most likely to them.

Possibly the most interesting element in the report is the identification by the Northern focus groups of a fifth “Stagnation’ scenario within the ‘no war’ and ‘united’ quadrant of the diagram. Based on a third uncertainty, which is given little attention these days, is the possibility that neither the 2010 elections nor the 2011 referendum will take place. They believe that “because elites in power in Khartoum and Juba have little to gain from [a election and a referendum], and prefer the present situation to continue.” This status quo situation would allow Sudanese and international actors to “muddle through, continuing to ‘band aid’ the Sudanese system together.”