Home | News    Monday 12 December 2011

China urges Sudan & South Sudan to break oil deadlock


December 11, 2011 (KHARTOUM) – China has encouraged Sudan and South Sudan to peacefully resolve their disputes over oil and border, warning of far-reaching consequences should the recently separated countries fail to do so.

JPEG - 33.9 kb
China’s envoy for African affairs, Liu Guijin (L), and UK Special Envoy for Darfur Michael Ryder (REUTERS)

Sudan and South Sudan have been at loggerheads over the fees Juba should pay for the use of Khartoum’s pipeline infrastructure to bring the landlocked South’s oil to export terminals in Sudan’s main sea outlet in Port Sudan.

AU-mediated talks held between the two sides in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa collapsed in late November as Khartoum threatened to impose a unilateral fee of $36 per barrel and confiscate oil shipped from the south which, according to Khartoum, has not paid any fees for the use of its pipelines since independence.

The South said it would consider suspending the production if Sudan carried out its threats.

China is the biggest investor in Sudanese oil, most of which was taken by the South when it seceded in July. In response to the crisis, China dispatched its envoy for African affairs, Liu Guijin, in order to break the deadlock.

A statement reported on Sunday by Xinhua quoted Liu Guijin as expressing his country’s concern and that of the international community towards the developments.

"China encourages the two parties to stick to the peaceful option, adopt active procedures to avoid further escalation and resolve the difference through dialogue and negotiations," he added.

Liu Guijin arrived in Khartoum on Thursday after visiting South Sudan’s capital Juba where he held talks with senior officials including president Salva Kiir. In Khartoum, the Chinese envoy held talks with the Sudanese Vice-President Ali Osman Mohamed Taha on Saturday and exchanged viewpoints on the dispute.

According to Xinhua’s report, Taha said that his country would positively deal with the mediation efforts of the international community and expressed Sudan’s hope that China would play a positive role to push the efforts to resolve the outstanding issues.

Prior to the meeting, the Chinese diplomat warned of serious consequences if the two sides failed to resolve the dispute over oil transit fees and demarcation of borders.

“If the two sides fail to resolve the problem, the whole region would be affected, the repercussions would be very serious," he said. "The consequences would be lose lose for all."

South Sudan last week said it offered to pay an average of 70 U.S per barrel. The two sides are expected to resume talks in Addis Ababa in about a week.


Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.

- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments

Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.

There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your comment as an article to comment@sudantribune.com

Kind regards,

The Sudan Tribune editorial team.
  • 12 December 2011 07:37, by mohammed ali

    ((South Sudan last week said it offered to pay an average of 70 U.S per barrel.))Are you serious Sudan Tribune!Well, it is not a claim , it is a fact that SS is exporting it’s oil for free up to know!This is done in a good will, unfortuntely some people misunderstand this as a weakness.Sudan Tribune also failed probably intentionaly that SS refused all mediators proposals.Well let us wait another.

    repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 07:40, by mohammed ali

      ..6 months when new oilfields enter the service! Probably they might export through Ugand and Kenya for free!

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 12:10, by P.K.M

        Ali, I believe we’ll pay the same amount you’re demanding to Kenyan or Ugandan, how is that feel? We’re the sellers, and we can hire whoever we want, you are not going to be telling us who our employee will be, it’s our business, not yours. Remember, you’re looking for $ 36 per barrel transit fees, go and find someone else that’s going to pay you that and stop whining here on the net.

        repondre message

        • 12 December 2011 14:13, by mohammed ali

          PKM, when to pay for them? after 3-4 years? For sure it is not going to be tomorrow!When driven by hate only you will loose any sense of logic! You need time and finance in a very high risk area, people will eventually want their money back! That money will be in billions, not a joke.We are not whining we are calling to negotiate in good faith.If this didn’t happen we will see who will be crying!

          repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 18:44, by Mapuor

        Oil does not rot dear readers,it will still be usefull tomorrow if not used now

        repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 08:23, by Sam.Eto

      You dont get it brother Ali. The S. Sudanese have no will of their own. They are controlled by the Americans. NO ONE can deny that. They are your Master. America is pushing South Sudan to delay an agreement as long as possible. By this it is hoping the Sudanese Economy would collapse and a Sudanese Spring, riots and rebellion intensify. The S. Sudanese GOSS are cheap pawns bribed to their neck

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 12:15, by Force 1

        Sam.Eto and Ali, it’s less than a dollar per barrel transit fee! So take it or leave it! Stop whining like a baby!

        repondre message

        • 12 December 2011 14:59, by mohammed ali

          Force,it is not less than a dollar; it is comletely free now for more than 6 months!We are not whining , we have just being patint untill you come to your senses; unfortunately when it is too late!Itis excately when burn and kill yourselves with hatred, you start thinking, sad!

          repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 22:16, by Elijah B. Elkan

        Mr. Sam.Eto, For your information sir, south Sudan is less than 6 month old and doing better than Khartoum. Now, who does United States control?. I will answer that for you. United States control the government in Khartoum. Remember, United States had bombed Khartoum and they will do it again if it need be. North Sudan is a terrorist state, and you people will never get rid of the stigma.

        repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 08:26, by Sam.Eto

      Its never about South Sudan. Its a failed state and everyone knows this. The Americans and Israelis want to make use of this to fight their was against the last 2 standing independent states in the middle east - Sudan and Iran. When the Americans achieve this they will control all oil in the region and hence denying China its current advantage and slowing its rise.

      repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 09:21, by Logic

      M.Ali, I think its a misprint and its suppose to be 0.70 p/b! As for your racist friend, can you try to explain to him that every nation worldwide has to deal with the powerful ones and sometimes heed to their demands, just like how the U.S threatened Sudan into cooperation after 9/11.

      It does not mean they control you but have tremendous influence. S. Sudan is not exempt from this influence.

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 14:02, by mohammed ali

        Logic, are the devil’s advocate? Well they said also 0.41 even if we take your correction, which one is right!

        repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 09:26, by Logic

      And you know full well, allowing southern oil to flow through the north has nothing to do with "good will". Its called “Chinese influence”. lol

      If the NCP had an ounce of good will in their doctrine, Sudan would not have reached this sorry state of affairs. Division, civil war, international isolation, sanctions and economic crisis, etc etc..

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 10:48, by SSLA/M Supporter

        China and Sudan should not let SPLA/M buy time while preparing to relocate the oil pipeline to Kenya! They must work hard to dismantle that corrupt regime by supporting SSLA/M and Athor, otherwise things will get out of hands! Your future in RoSS is here with SSLA/M and Athor!

        repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 13:29, by mohammed ali

        Of course Chinese has influence, you have to wiegh your interests! But at the end of the day you will look at your own interest,Chinese are not going to ask us to transport for free neither they would accept somthing different from the IMF or AU proposal.It is stupid to count on presumed Chinese pressurem!Our interest is oil to go through Sudan, and I believe that the same for the South, ...

        repondre message

        • 12 December 2011 14:04, by mohammed ali

          .. neither it is in our interest to strangulate the south but it is not going to be free! Now 6 months the south is not willing to pay, if this not good will, what is it!Chinese pressure..oh China gives us everything for free!They also want us to pay back their loans!It cannot be a win/loose situation, otherwise it will be take it or leave , at the right time! Bear with me another 6 months!

          repondre message

          • 12 December 2011 14:36, by SSLA/M Supporter

            Eye for eye and tooth for tooth! Why allowing SPLA/M to use port Sudan for 6 months and free of charge when the same greedy and hostile SPLA/M is working hard to destroy Sudan economically and militarily using oil as a tool! Sudan must deduct transit fee without approval of that corrupted militia! don’t feel sorry for that selfish regime that doesn’t feel sorry for its own people of RoSS!

            repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 12:21, by Jay

      Mohammad, what happen to you slogan, the “take it or leave it saying”? You’re showing weakness to you people!

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 14:48, by mohammed ali

        Jay, it is still there, see above posting! Unfortuntely, things will go that direction, if no agreement is reached! I said not because I like it , but because it is a fact of life.Let me be clear it is in our interest oil to go through Sudan , but for free! If no agreement is reached, then it will be take it or leave! Such is the life!

        repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 15:44, by Baring

      Dear Mohamrap

      Since the sudan Gvt. build this paip line, they got a lot of money out of it without shearing with all the region of Sudan. Now our first issue is not fees it is a border, we need the issue of border to be discuss first than oil fees. your Govt. in Khartoum is colapsing, soon you will see more then what is going on.

      repondre message

  • 12 December 2011 10:04, by J P Puok

    Mohamed Ali, simple logic, how much is the current world price/barrel? when mispelling occured, don’t rejoy over it. it is a human error as you in the page spelled Lomumba as lomamba understandable. if we offer you $70/barrel how much remain with us? simple logic. secondly we owned that pipeline half since it was built using our money from our oil!

    repondre message

    • 12 December 2011 11:04, by Sundayw

      I think that was $7/barrel as estimated based on cost of transport and other overheads. That is still high because it should cost no more than $4.31/barrel but South is being very generous indeed to help North with shocks to its economy. As for $32-36/barrel, I say dream on.

      repondre message

      • 12 December 2011 20:09, by mohammed ali

        Sundayw, it is not only transit fees, here we are talking about; it is processing,transporting,storing, shipping , security and then transit fees!Oil is not flowing free , you have to pump it at certain distances and this will need energy to pump it, defintly this will cost more than 4 dollars!How did you reach your 4.3 $

        repondre message

        • 13 December 2011 03:59, by Sundayw

          There is what is called economies of scale. Millions of barrels are flowing each year through the pipeline. A single barrel of oil is not a good measure of usage. When you consider millions, then you start calculating the cost in their totality. Sudan is not the first country to lease its pipeline. It’s been done in Cameroon and elsewhere. Chad pays not more than $4.31/barrel. Sudan is no special.

          repondre message

  • 12 December 2011 12:51, by Runrach

    Could somebody help me understand the figure that was writter in the above mentioned article ? Was it 70 cents/ Dollars ?

    repondre message

Comment on this article


The following ads are provided by Google. SudanTribune has no authority on it.

Sudan Tribune

Promote your Page too

Latest Comments & Analysis

Khartoum dialogue process aborted sustainable peace in Sudan 2016-10-26 21:56:53 By Mahmoud A. Suleiman The October 10 2016 extravaganza of the Wathba Works Final Conference Ceremony brought nothing to the Sudanese people but Bashir remaining further on the Helm. He tried (...)

Funding our Universities to Deliver on their Mandate: The Case of University of Juba 2016-10-25 21:41:52 *By John A. Akec UNIVERSITIES AND NATION-BUILDING “Before going to war, Haifa must speak”, Israeli politicians are apt to telling their audience. This is specially so, when showcasing the (...)

52nd Anniversary of the glorious October 21, 1964 Sudanese revolution 2016-10-21 12:43:46 By Mahmoud A. Suleiman Friday the 21st October 2016 will mark the 52nd Anniversary of the Glorious Sudanese October 21, 1964 Revolution. On that date, my memories go far back to the unique (...)


Latest Press Releases

Amnesty urges to investigate chemical weapons Sudan’s Jebel Marra 2016-10-12 12:52:01 Sudan: International chemical weapons investigation urgently needed into horrific Jebel Marra attacksAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL NEWSFLASH 11 October 2016 Sudan: International chemical weapons (...)

UNAMID JSR’s statement read to the media on peace in Darfur 2016-10-10 20:57:56 African Union United Nations Mission in Darfur Though the region of Darfur is relatively peaceful at this time, a small portion of Jebel Marra within Darfur continues to be intermittently (...)

Sudan: No justice for protester killings 2016-09-23 08:03:30 (Nairobi, September 22, 2016) – Sudanese authorities have yet to provide justice to victims of a violent crackdown on anti-austerity protesters in Khartoum in September 2013, the African Centre (...)


Copyright © 2003-2016 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.