Amnesty International has called upon the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to extend the arms embargo against South Sudan, which is due for renewal on May 29. This embargo has been a critical component of United Nations sanctions imposed since 2015, aimed at curbing widespread human rights abuses and war crimes committed by all parties involved in the country’s prolonged civil conflict.
The civil war, which formally concluded in 2020 with the formation of a coalition government, left a legacy of violence and instability, continuing to erupt sporadically. Renewed tensions as of March 2025 have once again highlighted the persistent risk of escalation, prompting calls to maintain the embargo. Amnesty International argues that lifting the embargo would be a mistake, given the current political volatility and the risk it presents to fragile peace efforts. More details on the UNSC’s role in these sanctions can be found on the UN Security Council’s official site.
Contrastingly, the African Union Peace and Security Council (AUPSC), along with the UNSC’s African member states—Somalia, Sierra Leone, and Algeria—have advocated for the embargo’s cessation. They posit that the removal of the embargo is crucial for security sector reform and the unification of opposing military factions within South Sudan. However, this viewpoint clashes with the African Union’s Agenda 2063, which seeks to achieve peace across the continent by 2030, according to Agenda 2063 aspirations.
Amnesty further emphasizes the need for stringent enforcement of the embargo, citing a March incident where Uganda sent military support to South Sudan without UNSC approval. This, Amnesty asserts, reflects violations of both the embargo and international law, stressing the imperative need to bolster measures against unauthorized arms imports to achieve a peaceful resolution in line with Agenda 2063 objectives.
The UNSC’s capacity to adopt binding resolutions is contingent upon the support of at least nine of its 15 member states, without any vetoes from its five permanent members. Thus, lifting the embargo would require substantial backing from the broader council, further complicating the issue amid regional and international dynamics. For a comprehensive exploration of the current situation, read more on JURIST – News.