Splitsville?

The new Sudanese peace accord, lauded frothily in Nairobi by Colin Powell and a bevy of African leaders, is much more than a peace accord. It stipulates not only an end to hostility and a withdrawal of armed forces, but essentially gives the rebellious South the opportunity to split off and become its own country.

According to the terms of the agreement (The Nation, BBC, NYTimes), the rebels retain the rights to keep their own military intact, govern southern Sudan autonomously for six years, receive half of Sudan's oil revenues, and hold a plebiscite after the six years in order to determine whether the region will secede or remain with Sudan. The central government, meanwhile, must rewrite its constitution so that Sharia law no longer applies to non-Muslims.

As happy as we all are to see the end to a conflict that killed two million people and displaced twice that number, the terms of the agreement look like a new conflict in the making. Each side is smiling and scheming: the rebels have essentially won the first round, and have no intention of reintegrating into Sudan in 2011. Khartoum, for its part, may have been beaten in the South, but is quite secure in the North, and will use the break to rebuild its armed forces and will not part with the South and its oilfields in 2011 - or ever - unless compelled to by force of arms.

The only hope is that the armistice period will be peaceful itself, and that cooler heads take leadership on both sides before war returns in 2011.