Border Tensions Reignited: Abyei and the Spillover Risks from Sudan’s Civil War

The Abyei region, of significant strategic importance, has been a contested area between Sudan and South Sudan for over a century, with unresolved territorial disputes dating back to colonial times. Characterized by extensive ethnic and historical complexity, Abyei has long been a flashpoint for intercommunal tensions. These tensions are further exacerbated by Abyei’s oil reserves and fertile grazing land, which make it economically valuable. Since the outbreak of Sudan’s civil war in April 2023, state authority in border areas has eroded, increasing instability. The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have competing interests potentially stretching into the region, heightening the risk of conflict escalation. The ongoing war has led to large-scale displacement into South Sudan, straining local resources and increasing ethnic tensions further. This article will examine Abyei’s historical dispute, the impact of Sudan’s civil war, and potential pathways for conflict resolution, emphasizing the risk of spillover and the factors contributing to regional destabilization.

Historical Background

To fully grasp the tensions surrounding the Abyei region and the spillover risk created by Sudan’s current conflict, it is essential to examine the historical roots of these disputes. The colonial context plays a crucial role in this regard. Under Anglo-Egyptian rule in 1905, Abyei was administratively transferred from Bahr el Ghazal (Southern Sudan) to Kordofan (Northern Sudan) under British colonial administration, creating long-term territorial ambiguities. The region’s ethnic composition further complicates the conflict: the Ngok Dinka (permanent settlers, linked to South Sudan) and the Misseriya tribes (seasonal nomads, aligned with Sudan) historically shared resources but later clashed due to political and economic shifts. Abyei became a battleground over its contested identity, with the Ngok Dinka advocating for reintegration into the South. Its extensive oil reserves have sustained strategic interest in the region throughout Sudan’s civil wars, leaving its legal status unresolved even after the 2011 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). Shortly after the CPA, Sudanese forces briefly occupied Abyei, triggering international condemnation and the deployment of the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA). The African Union (AU) and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) have struggled to broker a lasting resolution, leaving Abyei vulnerable to external shocks. Sudan’s ongoing civil war has further exacerbated instability, increasing the likelihood that historical grievances and ethnic tensions could ignite renewed violence and spillover conflict.

The Impact of Sudan’s Civil War on the Abyei Conflict

The ongoing conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has severely weakened Sudan’s central government since April 2023, creating security vacuums in peripheral regions, including Abyei. Sudanese state institutions previously responsible for managing Abyei-related issues, such as the Abyei Joint Oversight Committee, are now largely dysfunctional, allowing non-state actors to escalate tensions unchecked. With Sudan’s internal conflict diverting political and military resources, armed groups and militias have gained autonomy, making ethnic tensions increasingly difficult to control. The risk of a proxy conflict in Abyei is significant, as the RSF, which controls much of Darfur and western Sudan, may seek to expand its influence southward through allied armed groups. Meanwhile, the SAF, struggling to maintain territorial control, could escalate tensions in Abyei as part of broader national security concerns, countering RSF movements in the south. Ethnic rivalries and long-standing disputes over land and resources have played a crucial role in fueling Sudan’s civil war. The influx of small arms into border regions has strengthened local militias, including Misseriya and Ngok Dinka armed groups. The potential for ethnic recruitment of Abyei-based militias by either the RSF or SAF to gain territorial leverage poses a serious threat. War-related economic disruptions, disputes over oil revenues, and increased refugee flows further contribute to the destabilization of the Sudan-South Sudan border. Escalating violence in Abyei could provoke South Sudanese military involvement, leading to direct confrontations with Sudanese forces. The absence of clear border demarcation and a legal framework for Abyei’s governance increases the likelihood of armed skirmishes.

Spillover Risks and Broader Regional Instability

Analysing potential developments in the region, it becomes evident that an expansion of the RSF-SAF conflict into Abyei is closely linked to the risk of direct military clashes between Sudan and South Sudan. Abyei could emerge as a flashpoint for state-level conflict, as its unresolved legal status heightens the likelihood of direct engagement between Sudanese and South Sudanese forces. South Sudan’s government may intervene militarily if Ngok Dinka communities come under attack from Sudanese-aligned militias. Should the RSF and SAF extend their hostilities into Abyei, the deployment of South Sudan’s armed forces (SSPDF) could further escalate tensions. The RSF’s historical ties to Arab nomadic groups, including certain Misseriya factions, may deepen ethnic divisions in the region. In response, Ngok Dinka militias—potentially backed by South Sudanese forces—could retaliate, leading to broader intercommunal violence. Sudanese political elites might exploit the Abyei conflict to stir nationalist sentiments, diverting attention and resources from domestic peace efforts. Similarly, South Sudanese leaders could militarize the dispute, intensifying regional instability. Unregulated border movements facilitate arms trafficking and uncontrolled refugee flows, further destabilizing the situation and complicating peacekeeping efforts by international organizations such as the UN, AU and IGAD.

Pathways to Resolution and Conflict Prevention

The sheer complexity of the conflict potential underscores the necessity of resilient conflict resolution mechanisms to address the spillover risk between the ongoing Sudan conflict and South Sudan. Strengthening regional mediation mechanisms is essential in this regard. Enhancing IGAD- and AU-led diplomatic efforts to adopt a more coordinated approach in mediating between Sudan and South Sudan would be a step in the right direction. Ensuring inclusive negotiations with key local actors—Ngok Dinka, Twic Dinka, and Misseriya factions—is crucial for achieving sustainable solutions. Additionally, renewed efforts to implement the AU’s proposed 2012 referendum, aimed at determining Abyei’s legal status, could provide a viable legal framework for resolution. Strengthening UNISFA’s mandate and implementing joint Sudan-South Sudan security mechanisms could help enforce demilitarization and prevent cross-border militia activities, thereby reducing the risk of proxy conflicts. Maintaining a bilateral approach could also improve cross-border refugee and aid management, preventing a further displacement crisis while mitigating competition over oil resources and grazing land.

Conclusion

A closer examination of Abyei’s recent history reveals persistent conflict-driving factors that heighten the risk of spillover from Sudan’s ongoing war into South Sudanese territory. The Abyei conflict remains unresolved due to historical grievances, ethnic tensions, and competing territorial claims that persisted despite the 2011 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the African Union’s 2012 efforts to establish sustainable solutions. If left unaddressed, Abyei could become a flashpoint for renewed violence between Sudan and South Sudan. As the Sudanese civil war further destabilizes the region, ongoing instability threatens IGAD’s peace efforts and exacerbates arms trafficking, displacement, and militia activity. To prevent further conflict, stronger diplomatic, security, and economic frameworks must be implemented. The UN, AU, and IGAD must align their efforts to facilitate a lasting peace agreement, ensuring a more coordinated and effective approach to stabilizing Abyei and mitigating the risks of regional destabilization.