Fighting broke out in South Sudan on its fifth independence day anniversary last week, as forces loyal to President Kiir and Vice-President Machar began a free-for-all fight in its capital, Juba which quickly spread to other cities. Hundreds of soldiers and civilians have been killed in what is now leaning towards a full blown civil war. Both leaders have ordered for a ceasefire from their forces, echoing the United Nations’ orders issued on Sunday, calling on “those fighting to return to their Barracks.” Ironic words when, in a way, the UN contributed to the deaths.

The youngest country in the world is just recovering from a Civil War that ended in 2014, but not before thousands of South-Sudanese died and others were made refugees. Salva Kiir, who has led South Sudan since it broke away from Sudan via a referendum in 2011, dismissed his Vice President, Machar, in 2013 after declaring his interest to run for President. This sparked a 20-month-long Civil War that eventually ended in 2015, when the UN ordered both factions to sign a peace agreement within two weeks or risk being sanctioned and embargoed.

Kiir expressed his “serious reservations” then, but he and Macahar still signed the agreement, albeit under duress. Machar was then re-instated as Vice-President of South Sudan, eventually locking the people of South Sudan into a war “vacuum.” Kiir is from the dominant Dimka ethnic group in South Sudan, while Machar is from the Nuer ethnic group, unfortunately both ethnic groups are usually at loggerheads. South Sudan has no sufficient centralised authority, or at least has not had enough time to establish one. This means that factions in the country have more or less equal might, leaving the civilians to bear the brunt of their “show of strengths.”

Also, aspects of the 2015 agreement pointed to the fact that there would be problems in the future. Telling both factions to sign a peace agreement which was hardly beneficial to both parties,(Machar who wants to be leader in his own right was made Kiir’s deputy again) meant a war was still on the horizon. This brief skirmish could become another civil war, all thanks to the UN’s carrot or stick approach. “We most likely witnessed an acceleration…into a full-on war in Juba between the two parties,” Clemence Pinaud, an Assistant Professor at Indiana University, told Reuters.

Now, the United Nations is warning that the fighting might “constitute war crimes,” once again seemingly threatening two warlords who have no qualms shedding blood.

Meanwhile, al-Bashir, the President of Sudan still has a warrant on his head from the ICC, which has not prevented him from travelling by the way, and Saudi Arabia is still running circles around the UN with all its human rights violations. The UN’s actions seem like one of a cowardly bully; flex your biceps aggressively towards those you can control, while cowering from those you can’t. It needs to be more cautious in dealing with South Sudan or risk instigating another war.