The Troika said they didn’t sign the agreement because they were denied engagement with the parties and that they can not be guarantors of an agreement they did not offered a chance to engage with its signitories.
The United Nations special envoy for Sudan and South Sudan Christopher Trott said the Sudanese mediators used a different mechanism, during the negotiation in Khartoum leading up to the final peace deal signed in Addis Ababa in September.
The British diplomat explained that they do not disagree with the different approach used by the Sudanese government but had to abstain from signing because they were not involved compared to the 2015 peace agreement.
“We had been intimately involved in the negotiations in 2015, this time around I think the Sudanese mediators took a very different approach, and we are not criticizing in any way that approach. But we felt that we had not had that opportunity to engage in a discussion about the agreement, so we felt that it was not at that stage appropriate to sign it,” he was quoted by the Eye radio as saying.
Tott pointed out that they was no reason the United States, United Kingdom and Norway could add their views on the agreement because they had not been given a room to do so.
According to the Eye Radio, the United Kingdom Diplomat is expected to travel to Khartoum later today to meet opposition figures on the reported violations of the permanent ceasefire agreement in various part of South Sudan.
In recent days, fighting between opposition and government troops has been alarming as it renews fear that the latest agreement may collapse.
