The study examines the overall effectiveness of the IGAD as a peacemaker in the conflict in the Republic of South Sudan from its independence in 2011 to 2023. This was done through examining the effectiveness, institutional framework, strategies, and challenges of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in resolving the South Sudan conflict. Grounded on the realist and liberal institutionalist theories of international relations, which provide competing yet complementary lenses for analysing IGAD's interventions in South Sudan, the study employed a mixed methods approach with a strong emphasis on descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative interviews. Data was collected from key stakeholders to assess IGAD’s peacebuilding interventions, the implementation of the 2015 Peace Agreement, and the institutional structures supporting these efforts. Findings reveal that IGAD’s role in peace mediation, stakeholder engagement, power-sharing proposals, and humanitarian assistance has been partially effective. However, significant limitations persist, including the absence of peacekeeping operations, weak enforcement mechanisms, technical loopholes in peace agreements, and persistent internal and external political interferences. The study also highlights gaps in sensitising warring parties on the implications of war, disarmament efforts, and equitable stakeholder inclusion. Institutional weaknesses, such as a lack of standardised monitoring systems and limited capacity to address competing member state interests, further constrain IGAD’s effectiveness. Based on these findings, the study recommends expanding IGAD’s mandate to include peacekeeping and disarmament operations, institutionalising monitoring and enforcement bodies, promoting neutral and inclusive dialogue processes, and strengthening internal accountability frameworks. Future research should explore comparative regional peacebuilding models, the role of grassroots actors in IGAD interventions, and the long-term sustainability of regional peace agreements to deepen understanding and guide reforms in regional conflict resolution mechanisms.
Benjamin H. Levi (2025) studied this question.