12 December 2014 - Peace was the single biggest priority before South Sudanese refugees and internally displaced people could go back home, according to a survey released today by the International Republican Institute (IRI).

But the survey, which collected information through face-to-face interviews with 2,505 adults displaced in South Sudan or seeking refuge in Uganda and Kenya, revealed limited confidence in the peace process in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

“While 48 per cent of respondents said they were aware of the ongoing peace and reconciliation process … less than half of that group believes the process will reflect their views,” a press release issued by IRI said.

The survey noted that 15 per cent of respondents gave security as the most urgent pre-requisite for going home, while another 14 per cent said the most vital was provision of basic needs.

“When asked differently, nearly a third of respondents believe the international community should address their basic needs, food and health services in order for families to be able to return home,” the release noted.

Asked about a solution to the current crisis, 53 per cent listed a transitional government but 27 per cent disagreed, saying such a government would bring together groups that do not understand each other or have a hidden agenda, the survey noted.

“When discussing democratic institutions such as political parties, there was mixed confidence,” the survey said. “More than half the respondents said political parties do not represent their needs.”

The survey also noted that most IDPs and refugees interviewed, despite gender or age, found it more important to identify themselves by their nationality than their tribes.

Following a presentation of the findings, three South Sudanese panelists participated in a discussion and responded to questions from the audience.

Dr. Luka Biong, Director of the Centre for Peace at the University of Juba, felt that the survey’s findings showed that “the glass is half full for South Sudan”.

“As a nation, we should have hope,” he said. “If the majority of those suffering still identify themselves by nationality, we should look at this as a means to promote and widen opportunities for unity, peace and security.”

Dr. Biong stressed that civil society has a vital role to play in advocacy to ensure that important findings from the survey can be translated into meaningful action.

The Director of Training at The SUDD Institute, Zachary Diing Akol, said there was a need for South Sudanese to initiate informal peace processes using faith-based organizations and traditional authorities in addition to formal negotiations.

Mr. Akol criticized both parties to the conflict and other stakeholders participating in the peace process, including the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, which he said was continually shifting goal posts and causing confusion.

“I was in Addis Ababa for two months and there were divisions everywhere – divisions among civil society representatives, among political parties and the warring factions,” he said. “They all have a ‘who gets what’ agenda, yet it is clear, from the people’s voices that the priority is peace and then reconciliation and power-sharing can follow.”

Noting that the “mindset of both parties to conflict is still a military solution”, Mr. Akol called on the international community to be more engaged in the peace process.

“They say they don’t want to muddy the waters, but the waters have already been muddied,” he said.