MARATTO

article · East African Journal of Arts and Social Sciences

External Interventions and Local Realities: A Critical Assessment of Security Sector Reform in South Sudan

2026Open accessUniversity of Juba

Abstract

This study examines the role of international partners in security sector reform (SSR) in South Sudan, grounded in the Security-Development Nexus theoretical framework, which posits that sustainable peace is unattainable without the reciprocal reinforcement of physical security and socio-economic progress. Using a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey with 127 respondents in Juba City, the research employs descriptive and inferential statistics to analyse international contributions and constraints. Chi-square analysis revealed significant differences in perceptions of international partner contributions (ƛ2 = 67.32, p < 0.001$). Pearson correlation showed moderate positive relationships between international support and SSR progress (r = 0.58, p < 0.001). T-test analysis indicated significant differences between perceptions of bilateral versus multilateral support (t = 3.87, p < 0.001). Findings identify key international roles, including capacity building, policy support, and funding, while highlighting constraints such as inadequate coordination (44%), conflicting interests (36%), and trust deficits (11%). The study concludes that while international support is influential, its effectiveness is limited by these constraints, underscoring the need for improved coordination, sustained commitment, and context-sensitive approaches. Based on these findings, the study recommends prioritising integrated reform-development strategies and establishing formal accountability mechanisms to align external interventions with local realities.

Research topics

  • Peacebuilding and International Security
  • Gender, Security, and Conflict
  • Military and Defense Studies

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.37284/eajass.9.1.4696

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.