Purpose:This study examined the paradox of sovereignty without nationhood in post-secession African states, focusing on South Sudan and Eritrea. It sought to understand how sovereignty, governance systems, and ethnic identity interact to shape peace, stability, and nation-building outcomes following independence. Methodology:The study employed a qualitative comparative research design based on documentary analysis. Data were drawn from government records, policy documents, and existing scholarly literature. The analysis was guided by theories of nationhood, self-determination, and social transformation, while thematic analysis was used to identify patterns related to governance, militarisation, and identity politics. Findings:The findings revealed that both South Sudan and Eritrea possess juridical sovereignty—international recognition without corresponding internal legitimacy. In South Sudan, ethnic fragmentation and elite rivalry weakened national cohesion and fueled recurring conflict. In Eritrea, centralized and militarised authoritarian governance suppressed dissent, substituting coercion for genuine unity. In both cases, sovereignty remained largely symbolic, sustained more by external recognition and force than by inclusive governance or democratic consent. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy:The study advances the understanding that sovereignty alone is insufficient for sustainable peace; it must be accompanied by nationhood grounded in inclusivity, justice, and shared identity. It contributes to theory by linking nationhood deficits to structural insecurity in post-secession states. Practically, it underscores the need for institutional reforms, civic education, and conflict transformation approaches. From a policy perspective, it highlights the role of regional bodies in supporting inclusive state-building processes.
Louis et al. (2026) studied this question.