The recent political concerns of Sudan have been well documented both domestically and internationally. Civil war between the North and South, which began in 1955, has ravaged the country intermittently throughout the last half-century and was only officially ended with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA, 2005). Tensions remain high in this respect and national arguments are often envisaged in terms of a North-South divide.

The signing of the CPA in 2005 laid out a series of plans designed to work Sudan towards a democratic and peaceful resolution of these problems. In particular this included a framework for working towards National Elections and a referendum to decide possible secession of South Sudan from North Sudan. As of March 2010, the peace has remained intact if delicate. However, the April election has been plagued by controversy and acrimony which has led to partial boycotts from many of the opponents.

The CPA itself has also been subject to a great deal of criticism. In particular, some have stated that the CPA has exaggerated regional divisions by omitting the West and East of Sudan from talks and instead configuring a North-South/NCP-SPLM dichotomy. The implementation of the decisions in the CPA has also been flawed and heavily delayed, meaning that the CPA has struggled to live up to the lofty ambitions that were outlined in its text.

In 2010, the Sudan is going through one of the most challenging and transformative stages in its short and somewhat turbulent history. At no time since its independence in 1956 has this nation had to address so many complex and decisive issues as it has had to since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005. As June 2010 draws to a close and the CPA enters into its final closing chapter in which a referendum for Southern Sudan takes center stage, the world and the Sudanese people anxiously watch in anticipation of what is to become of the Sudan.