As South Sudan prepares its response to COVID-19, Ranga Gworo shares reflections on how COVID-19 prevention measures have interacted so far with deeply embedded cultural practices and the implications for conflict sensitivity, alongside some practical recommendations for how aid agencies could design cultural, and conflict, sensitive measures.
Even before the Government of South Sudan confirmed its first case of COVID-19 on 5 April, it had already begun to implement measures to control transmission of the virus. The approach has been informed by experiences of other countries, including Uganda and Kenya, which had already been hit by the wave of the pandemic as it spread across the globe. Steps taken by the Government thus far include allowing cargo goods to arrive via air and road, but closing its land and air borders to people, implementing social distancing and hygiene measures, based on WHO’s guidance, and closing down non-essential businesses and services.
In an effort to prevent and reduce the impact of the spread of the disease, public health guidance has been shared in collaboration with humanitarian agencies operating in country. Social distancing and hygiene measures – disseminated in written form and through radio and television – include regular washing of hands, avoiding physical contact including shaking hands and hugging, avoiding crowded places, keeping a distance of two metres from other individuals, a ban on public gatherings, and staying at or working from home as much as possible. As examined next, common cultural practices present some challenges for adherence to these measures.
Implications of social distancing for cultural practices
It is in the nature of South Sudanese to greet each other warmly and enthusiastically by shaking hands and other physical contact. Under normal circumstances, avoiding a greeting may be considered a social offence. It might signal, for example, that one person has a problem or dispute with another. If the public health rationale for refusing to shake someone’s hand is not understood by both individuals, this may lead to negative reactions and social pressures which run counter to public health advice. While some South Sudanese, especially those working for public and private institutions, have been quicker to adapt, the uptake has been slower across the wider South Sudanese society, leading to some confusion as to the ‘right’ way to respond, which could create or exacerbate tensions amongst individuals or groups.
South Sudanese are deeply religious people who often turn to their religious institutions in times of crisis. Similar social pressures and contradictory practices may arise when it comes to religious gatherings. The Government of South Sudan has declared a total ban on public gatherings, closing schools, markets, mosques and churches. On 23 March, both the Catholic and Episcopal Churches in South Sudan announced the suspension of church services and the closure of institutions (including schools) under their jurisdiction for one month. Congregations were advised to worship from home until the government advises that it is safe to engage in public and group worship. The South Sudan Council of Churches – uniting its member churches in South Sudan in ecumenical cooperation for peace – issued a pastoral letter reiterating a joint commitment to these measures.
However, as in other countries grappling with the pandemic, some Christian groups outside of the mainstream churches have issued contradictory messaging, arguing that church masses are exempted from the ban because they allegedly ‘act as a counter to the pandemic’. Some have gone so far as to challenge the Government’s measures by comparing it to the time in Juba when the Islamist Government of Sudan restricted Christian masses following the student protests against the government in the height of the civil war in 1990s. These contradictory messages have created tensions, not only between the Government and some Church groups’ leaders, but also between their followers and other South Sudanese who are following the guidance from the Government and mainstream churches.
There are particular ramifications for conflict sensitivity when it comes to funeral practices. As identified in lessons from the Ebola response in West Africa, approaches that are based solely on technical health considerations and ignore the cultural importance of funeral rites and ceremonies run the risk of being seen as irrelevant or actively challenged and circumvented by communities and their leaders. There is the strong social obligation for everybody to attend funerals, and religious leaders are obliged to provide spiritual services in religious buildings and beyond. Even in a time of COVID-19 and social distancing, this will mean it may be very difficult to deter people from organising or attending such ceremonies. Refusing to physically attend or officiate at funerals risks creating conflict, and individuals or religious leaders could be condemned as disrespecting the dead and their family. If the mainstream churches halt or limit the conducting of funerals as part of their efforts to limit the spread of COVID-19, this could undermine their standing within their congregations and their longer-term ability to mediate in conflict-related issues.
Finally, the practice of taking tea also illustrates the challenges, and conflict sensitivity issues, around the public acceptance of and compliance with social distancing measures. The culture of tea sipping is a daily ritual throughout South Sudan. Tea places serve as spaces where people, especially men, socialise in urban areas. The ban will have a direct impact on the livelihoods of women running the tea stands, who often depend on their stand for income to meet their family’s needs. As a result, they have continued to try to do business, putting themselves at risk of both the disease and negative reactions from authorities. Afraid of this backlash, some women have moved away from open public places such as markets and streets and are now operating within their neighbourhoods instead.
The closure of tea stands and directives to stay at home also have wider ranging implications for women. A combination of men no longer being able to socialize and leave the house, and women’s reduced income generating opportunities, could result in increased tensions and a corresponding increase in domestic violence. If livelihood assistance and protections for women are reduced as agencies shift to a COVID-19 response, this could put women, particularly those from poorer households who rely on daily income from tea stands, at even greater risk.
Our examples illustrate a key question when it comes to conflict sensitive practice and COVID-19 measures – for all their positive health benefits, what are the potential negative consequences of these policies and regulations? And crucially, how can any potential negative consequences be mitigated to ensure that they are effective? How can the most vulnerable in society, who are most at risk of the negative impacts of COVID-19 both directly and indirectly, be supported to continue to survive and make a living in a way that protects both them and wider society?
Conflict sensitive methods which could help to overcome these issues
These are just a few examples of the tensions between globally prescribed measures to control the spread of COVID-19 and South Sudanese cultural practices. They are not the only ones – South Sudanese are culturally obliged to visit or care for sick relatives in hospital, especially women who generally play a caretaker role in such a circumstance. Due consideration of how to balance these cultural intricacies with necessary health measures can help to identify not only the risks but also some important opportunities that can contribute to ensuring that measures are more impactful. Some recommendations for aid agencies to consider include:
- Work with local leaders to identify alternatives to handshaking: Many local leaders are respected within, and can be held accountable by, their communities. Their direct engagement in the sharing of health and sanitation related messaging remains the most popular and preferred approach for many people. Leaders could help to identify the preferred alternative greeting method and advocate within their community for its adoption, alongside helping to explain other social distancing measures in ways that resonate with communities. Although radios are a popular means of reaching out, not everybody has a radio or attempts to listen to it.
- Ensure that information is accessible and disseminated in ways that are easily understood and from trusted sources: Religious leaders and institutions are influential and respected actors in South Sudan, especially when it comes to cultural practices and peace. Agencies should engage with religious institutions to support forums for their followers to discuss conflict-related issues around the COVID-19 measures – in particular building on or in complement to existing peace networks or forums. Given that these institutions are themselves affected with the outbreak, they need to be supported in order to continue to exist as the trusted source of information for the public, especially for those who don’t trust official narratives. There are current and past examples of religious radio programmes gaining popularity, with hundreds of people listening to and respecting their opinions and messages. Similar consideration should be given to working with and in support of traditional leaders and networks.
- Work with communities and their leaders to find culturally appropriate alternatives to essential social rituals that bring large numbers of people together, such as funerals and weddings: There are important lessons that can be learned from the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, many of which are applicable to South Sudan. Communities should be encouraged to postpone the funeral practices that follow burial, while still preserving the important rituals that allow community members to show respect for the deceased and his/her family. During the civil war, wedding celebrations and the payment of bride price were postponed amongst some communities living in Khartoum until the time of peace. Tapping into existing practices or experiences with postponement could offer a familiar option in some communities.
- Identify the risks that staying at home will present to vulnerable groups, particularly poorer women: COVID-19 will disproportionately affect poorer women and other vulnerable groups. Responses should be strongly informed by integrated gender and conflict analysis. Women and other vulnerable groups’ meaningful participation in decision-making processes will ensure that responses reflect and address their needs and concerns. Messaging specifically designed for women and other vulnerable groups should be prioritised – not least because women also play a major role as conduits of information in their communities and households. The higher risk of domestic violence should be acted upon, and additional appropriate support should be considered – for example with dedicated phone hotlines or tailored advice through existing support networks.
As has been explored in other blogs and analysis, in a context like South Sudan, the secondary impacts (economic, social, protection, on conflict) of COVID-19 are likely to have greater cumulative and long-term consequences than the direct impacts of the disease itself. Balancing the need for important preventative health-related measures alongside the wider risks requires a culturally informed and conflict sensitive understanding of the South Sudanese context and how these measures can be interpreted and implemented in more effective ways.
