In a fresh bid to inject momentum into South Sudan’s fragile peace process, allies of opposition leader Riek Machar have entered into a contract with Arsenal, a Washington-based lobbying and strategic communications firm. The deal underscores the determination of Machar’s Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement-In Opposition (SPLM-IO) to influence foreign policy circles in the United States, particularly under the administration of President Donald Trump, whom they see as a potential catalyst for renewed negotiations.
According to documents filed under the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), Arsenal has been retained to present SPLM-IO’s position to American policymakers, lawmakers, and think tanks. The goal, insiders say, is to reset perceptions of Machar’s movement abroad, highlight its vision for peace, and seek greater international pressure on President Salva Kiir’s government to recommit to the implementation of the 2018 Revitalized Peace Agreement.
The move comes amid mounting concern over the stalled peace deal and the fragile unity government formed in Juba. Tensions between Kiir and Machar continue to paralyze the transitional process, with disputes over security arrangements, power-sharing, and delayed elections threatening to plunge the country back into chaos.
By seeking the services of Arsenal, SPLM-IO hopes to reframe the narrative around its political agenda in Washington. Lobbying firms like Arsenal are adept at crafting messages, arranging high-level meetings, and building coalitions of support in Congress and the US State Department. For Machar’s allies, this represents an opportunity to counterbalance the South Sudanese government’s diplomatic influence and ensure that opposition grievances are not sidelined.
“South Sudan is at a crossroads,” one SPLM-IO representative familiar with the arrangement noted. “The international community, especially the United States, has a critical role to play in ensuring the peace process does not collapse. Our message is that the SPLM-IO is committed to peace, reform, and stability, but we need external partners to hold Juba accountable.”
This is not the first time South Sudanese political actors have turned to US lobbyists. Over the past decade, both the government and opposition factions have sought American intermediaries to plead their cases amid civil war and diplomatic deadlock. However, observers warn that lobbying contracts alone cannot substitute for genuine compromise among South Sudanese leaders.
The Trump administration’s posture toward South Sudan was often marked by skepticism of Juba’s leadership, with Washington imposing targeted sanctions on individuals accused of obstructing peace. Whether this new lobbying effort can translate into concrete pressure—or renewed US engagement in mediation—remains uncertain.
Analysts note that the SPLM-IO’s decision to channel resources into lobbying reflects both frustration with regional mediators and an attempt to leverage Washington’s geopolitical weight. “The peace process is faltering, and everyone is looking for leverage,” said a regional diplomat. “Machar’s camp believes that by appealing to Washington, they can shift the balance and create space for genuine progress.”
For the people of South Sudan, weary of years of conflict, displacement, and economic collapse, the outcome of such efforts could prove decisive. The question remains: will international lobbying open the door for renewed political will at home, or will it deepen mistrust between the parties?
