Political Science

Sudan has in the recent years been in the international limelight for a number of reasons. Currently, there is a huge outcry by the western governments and international human rights organizations over the allegations of government sponsored mass killings going on unabated in the countrys Darfur region. While the entire worlds attention is focused on the ongoing row between the countrys president Omar al-Bashir and the International Criminal Court, few have paid attention to the deteriorating economy as economic recession continues to debilitate what has once been described as one of the worlds fastest expanding economies. Indeed the countrys economy is at its knees and even the vast natural resources are not providing the necessary cushion. A critical analysis of the situation over the years indicates that the two major causes of this recession in economic growth revolve around the endemic corruption that has permeated almost all corners of the government as well as the raging division between the North and the South.

Like many countries in the third world, especially those in the south of Sahara, Sudan government has for years been rocked with allegations of corruption within its files and rank. The 2009 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) report puts Sudan as the fourth most corrupt country in the world after Somalia, Afghanistan and Myanmar. (Transparency International 2009)

Paying attention to the history of Sudan, one gets the idea that corruption and financial mismanagement is not a problem exclusive to the current al Bashirs regime but rather has been perpetuated right across from the nations foundation years. Sidahmed and Sidahmed (97) have conducted an intense study on the economic woes facing Sudan for years. In their analysis, they have pinpointed the 1980s and the 1990s to be the era when corruption and embezzlement of public funds spiraled out of control.  These were the days of President Nimeiri who institutionalized corruption and led to the dying out of the fire of Foreign Direct Investments that characterized the immediate post independence years. Indeed, the legacy of Nimeiri hold on to power had a debilitating impact on the Sudans economy and not even the self remedial tactics employed later could make an immediate turnaround. As Sidahmed and Sidahmed observe, adoption of Sudans open door policy from 1972 onwards for foreign investors did not lead to enhanced development, but helped accelerating consumerism, created a new class of profiteers and expanded corruption. (97)

While Nimeiri institutionalized corruption, there are those who claim that the current president, al Bashir has taken it to a new level despite the numerous futile pledges to stamp it out. Much of Sudans corruption is said to be centered in the military and also in the control of oil deals. Although Sudan has its own effective procurement laws, in most places these are selectively applied or ignored altogether. The most criticized is the military. Sudan has been under military leadership for close to twenty years since al Bashir took over the mantle of power. With little or no progress being made towards the democratization of the election process, the military has been a key political tool used for intimidation as well as embezzling of millions of oil dollars. With the military at the helm of leadership and also being embroiled in a number of regional and internal conflicts, military spending takes the biggest chunk of the countrys budget. Unsubstantiated claims have it the military spend close to one million dollars to run its daily chores. The military budget is kept a secret and leaking it is considered a serious offence.  It is hence this secrecy that has seen corruption within the top military officials ranks continue unabated leading to the loss of millions. As Werve has reiterated (233), military budgets are not disclosed and the government selects defense contractors secretly in the name of national security. 

The oil sector has also been embroiled in major scandals where tenders are awarded irregularly without following the laid down procedures. Most analysts allege that most of the contracts are awarded to big companies with the help top government official. Corruption allegations have also been extended to the Southern Sudan government which has been accused of embezzlement of funds and condoning corruption officials.

It is these allegations of corruptions and the need to bribe government officials that have been cited as factors that discourage Foreign Direct Investment. Most analysts concur that corruption has been a major hindrance to both social and economic development. For a country that ironically relies on a semi-developed agricultural sector and oil, Sudans economy lies on a shaky ground making it easier for minor global economic downturns to sweep it off its feet. Unemployment remains high with the larger proportion of the workforce being in the informal sector. Despite this country being the largest in Africa and also having one of the largest oil reserves, corruption and mismanagement of public funds have reduced most of the people to paupers surviving on one and a quarter a dollar a day (African Development Bank, 200736).

While endemic corruption has impeded on the countrys economic growth, the derailing divisions between the North and the South have almost left the country at its knees making it utterly susceptible to an economic recession. A mention of Sudan today evokes images of hunger and civil strife. The existing impasse between the Khartoum government and the South began more than two decades ago and in its wake have left thousands dead and an economic loss that will take generations to recover (Johnson, 2003 63).

To understand the magnanimity of this strife and the economic woes it has subjected the country to, it is crucial to trace its origin. Sudan gained independence in 1956 as a single nation despite its multi ethnic nature.  Tension however would arise later as the constitution was devoid of two crucial issues on the secularity of the state and also on whether the state would adopt a unitary or federal system. It is this row, in addition to other religious, economic and civil strife that have resulted to a massive bloodshed for over three quarters of the nations existence. The war was triggered by mutinous southerners over what was termed as a domination of the central government by the northern Arabs. What started as a petite mutiny developed later into a full blown rebellion with outside contacts and access to weapons that would support an orchestrated offensive against the Khartoum government. Attempts by the then President Nimeiri to end the insurgency bore fruits in 1972 after both the Khartoum government and the south reached an agreement that granted autonomy to the south. This led to a ceasefire that lasted for close to a decade before a more deadly insurgency erupted in 1983 due to Nimeiri attempts to introduce Sharia laws in Sudan. The new rebel outfit in the south became known as the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA). This was a liberal group comprising of Southern Sudan ethnic groups that were against the Khartoum government. For more than three decades, the SPLAM locked horns with Sudan soldiers leading to untold miseries to the southern Sudan residents. This is a period that would also witness grave violations of human rights carried out by the Sudan forces and also to some extent by the SPLAM. Unverified reports have it that close to two hundred thousand women and children fell victims of attacks by the Sudanese soldiers and were forced into slavery in the north (Yongo-Bure, 2007187).

Economically, this division between the north and the south has been debilitating and has completely impeded on any development plans initiated by the government. This has been brought forth by the fact that it rendered any exploitation of the natural resources in the south untenable, especially with the governments efforts being channeled towards quelling the ever growing rebellion in the south. This has been so to an extent that the country has been unable to cushion its people against the raging drought and has had to rely on international aid organizations to feed the more than three million people on the brink of starvation (Uppsala Conflict Data Program 2008).

Indeed, southern Sudan can be rightfully considered as the bread basket of country. Despite its numerous mineral resources, Sudan is hugely agricultural with over 95 percent of its entire workforce being in the agricultural sector. A large proportion of these products are grown in the south which, compared to the north, is fertile and also endowed with many natural resources. Due to ravages of war, these natural resources remain untapped and agriculture still remains under-developed.

Closely overtaking agriculture as the countrys backbone is oil, especially in the recent years when the prices of oil have soared. Oil has become a crucial commodity and is the main cause of the civil strife that has rocked the country for ages. The core reason for this is that most of the countrys reserves are located in the south and southerners have been agitating for a proportionate share of the oil proceeds. However, for a country with such a considerable amount of oil reserves, the economy has not grown any further than it was a decade ago. The southern region still remains underdeveloped. Economic indicators such as level of literacy, per capita income and infrastructure still remain regrettably low (CIA World Factbook 2010). The current recession has left the government unable to feed its people and instead has taken to expanding the defense budget in the face of widening rifts on the eve of the forthcoming referendum as provided in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) reached in 2005. It is these factors coupled with its obvious inability to protect its people that Sudan tops the list of the failed states in the world (Fund for Peace 2007).

Indeed, corruption and the divisions between the south and the north have driven Sudans economy to its knees. Although it is a country endowed with fertile lands and natural resources such as oil, these are not factors that are aptly reflected in the countrys economy. There are those however that may see the current economic recession to be as a result of the drought that had hit the country leading to acute food shortages. Others may allude to the alienation of Sudan by most western powers due to its worsening human rights reports, especially in the Darfur region, and its supposed link to terrorist groups such as al Qaeda (Political Terror Scale, 2009)

While it is undeniable that some of these factors may have played a role in the recession, it is crucial to point out that they are not exclusive to Sudan. A number of other African countries are still grappling with drought yet they have been able to record impressive economic growth rates. It would hence be untenable to fail to link the current economic recession in Sudan to the endemic corruption in the government and also the divisions between the south and the north.