Security Council Extends Sanctions Regime on South Sudan for One Year, Adopting Resolution 2731 (2024) by Vote of 9 in Favour, 6 Abstentions

The Security Council today extended for one year the sanctions regime — including asset freezes, travel bans and an arms embargo — imposed on South Sudan, reiterating its readiness to review arms embargo measures through modification, suspension or progressive lifting, in light of progress achieved on critical established benchmarks, as numerous speakers highlighted that the text fails to acknowledge Juba’s positive achievements and, instead, hinders its efforts to peace and stability.

Resolution 2731 (2024) (to be issued as document S/RES/2731(2024)) was adopted by a recorded vote of 9 votes in favour (Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States) to none against, with 6 abstentions (Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Russian Federation and Sierra Leone).

By its terms, the Council, underscoring that arms shipments in violation of this resolution risk fuelling conflict and contributing to further instability, strongly urged all Member States to identify and prevent such shipments within their territory.  It also reiterated its call on all Member States — in particular States neighbouring South Sudan — to inspect all cargo to South Sudan in their territory, if there are reasonable grounds to believe the cargo contains items the supply, sale or transfer of which is prohibited by paragraph 4 of resolution 2428 (2018).

Furthermore, the 15-member organ requested the Secretary-General — in close consultation with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) and the Panel of Experts set up to assist the South Sudan Sanctions Committee established pursuant to resolution 2206 (2015) in carrying out its mandate — to submit by 15 April 2025 an assessment report on progress achieved on the key benchmarks established in paragraph 2 of resolution 2577 (2021).

Also by the text, the Council decided to extend until 1 July 2025 the mandate of the Panel of Experts as set out in paragraph 19 of resolution 2428 (2018), and that the Panel should provide to the Council an interim report by 1 December 2024, a final report by 1 May 2025, and — except in months when these reports are due — updates each month.

Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, the United States’ delegate said the measures outlined in the resolution “continue to play a critical role in promoting peace and stability in South Sudan and the broader region,” and noted the importance of the Panel’s independent reporting.  The UN arms embargo remains necessary to stem the unfettered flow of weapons into a region flooded with guns, he said, adding that “too many people — especially women and children — have borne the brunt of this ongoing violence”.  The explosion of the ammunition depo in Juba in February only reinforced the need to reduce weapons in the country and put in place proper protocols to safeguard them, he added.

The representative of Algeria, speaking also for Guyana, Sierra Leone and Mozambique, said that while sanctions are powerful tools of the Council, they were conceived as “temporary measures to induce positive change when and where they are enforced”.  To prevent their unintended negative impact, the Council should continue to review how sanctions are designed and implemented.  In the case of South Sudan, the current regime — particularly the arms embargo — no longer serves the aim for which it was established.  On the contrary, it hinders the transitional Government from creating the necessary capacity to fully carry out outstanding tasks. This includes effectively equipping the necessary unified forces, he said.

“The time has come for the Council to make the necessary adjustments to South Sudan’s sanctions regime,” he stated.  Underlining the need for impartiality and transparent criteria for the imposition, adjustment and lifting of sanctions, he rejected “any attempt to use sanctions to exercise political pressure on African States”.

The Russian Federation’s delegate, who abstained during the vote, described the sanctions relief outlined in the document as “insufficient”.  Expressing regret that the United States continues to focus entirely on the sanctions’ regime, she said that the authorities of this “young nation” managed to “traverse the difficult path towards a relative stabilization”.  Yet, the sanctions regime has hardly undergone any changes.  Noting that the penholders are repeatedly proposing to “ignore all of Juba’s positive achievement and rubberstamp yet another decision that is burdensome for the country”, she said that Washington, D.C., is using the Council’s leverage over South Sudan’s authorities to achieve its own goals.  Noting that the proposal to ease the sanctions on Juba was “decisively rejected”, she observed that the imposition of additional unilateral restrictive measures aggravates South Sudan’s socioeconomic situation.

The representative of China, who also abstained, emphasized that the arms embargo has constrained South Sudan’s capacity-building and impeded the Government’s efforts to protect civilians, strengthen border control and maintain social stability.  Over the years, Juba has demonstrated political will and made progress in implementing sanctions-related benchmarks.  Nevertheless, despite the collective voices of the African Union and other regional organizations calling for lifting the arms embargo, the penholder has insisted on maintaining the sanctions.  To ease the situation on the ground, the Council should support the South Sudanese Government rather than impose sanctions, he said.

After the Council members spoke, the representative of South Sudan recognized the position of some delegates that sanctions — particularly the arms embargo — are necessary to maintain pressure and foster the peace process.  However, the formation of the unified armed command structure of the necessary unified forces and the implementation of the joined progress demonstrates South Sudan’s dedication to peace and stability.  The continued imposition of sanctions hinders the country’s efforts to build robust security institutions that maintain stability and protect its citizens.

Accordingly, she called for lifting the punitive measures, noting the detrimental effects of prolonged sanctions on Juba’s political and security landscape.  “Lifting of the arms embargo will empower us to further implement the agreement, enhance security and build sustainable peace,” she stressed, noting that reassessment of these measures will enable South Sudan to build robust security institutions necessary for maintaining peace and protecting its citizens.  The Council should focus on “measures that facilitate rather than hinder our progress”, she added.