Micah Zenko

Politics, Power, and Preventive Action

Zenko covers the U.S. national security debate and offers insight on developments in international security and conflict prevention.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Ending the South Sudan Civil War: A Conversation with Kate Almquist Knopf

by Micah Zenko
January 31, 2017


Kate Almquist Knopf, director of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, is the author of a recent Center for Preventive Action report on Ending South Sudan’s Civil War. We discussed the crisis in South Sudan and her outside-the-box proposal to address it, which involves establishing an international transitional administration for the country. She also offered some near-term recommendations for the Trump administration.

Knopf shares her advice for young professionals, and offers a fresh take on how the relationship between state and society could shift political institutions within Africa. Listen to my conversation with one of the world’s leading experts on South Sudan, and follow her on Twitter @almquistkate.

Post a Comment 1 Comment

  • Posted by Taban Toncwiny

    throughout the last five years conflict resolution has become a very complex phenomenon. The Troika ( USA, Great Britain, and Norway), IGAD, UN, and AU have abandoned the paths that could have brought peace and stability in South Sudan

    The institutions I mentioned above decided all of a sudden to take side with the Government of South Sudan regardless of the atrocities it has committed against civilians especially in Juba whereby mostly the Nuer tribe was targeted because its the tribe where Riak Machar hailed from and this fact is supported by the UN report compiled thereafter the civil war that broke out in Juba.

    IGAG has its interest in South Sudan that transcend the quest for peace for South Sudanese. they claimed to spearhead conflict resolution while at the same time they are directly involved in the war in South Sudan ( Uganda is fighting hand in hand with South Sudan military on the ground) This is not conflict resolution nor peace building.

    The UN and Troika could not sanction the government of South Sudan Regardless of the fact of atrocities they have but instead they resorted to blame the opposition leader for proclaiming violence. at the end they wanted to get rid of him as a solution to peace in South Sudan.

    those intitutions do not understand the problem of South Sudan if they do they are not interested in peace but they are there for their interests and by doing so they are creating more catastrophies in the country

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required