It is easy to be pessimistic about the Sudan peace deal signed last week in Kenya by Vice President Ali Osman Taha and John Garang, leader of the main southern rebel force, the SPLA. The history of Sudan over the past 20 years is littered with peace deals between north and south. It even looked at times as if the protocol signed last year, which led to last week’s accord, would go the same depressing way. Indeed it is something of a miracle that the two sides have managed to get this far. It could still break down; 90 percent of the dispute may have been dealt with — under the deal the south will be largely autonomous and have its own army for a six-year interim period, after which it can vote on its future — but the devil is always in the detail. The status of the capital Khartoum — whether it is a secular area as Garang demands or covered by Shariah law — still has to be agreed. So too has power and resource-sharing, as well as the status of three areas claimed by both sides.

Yet for once we, and more importantly the Sudanese people, can hope that a war which has killed over two million people and displaced millions more is at an end. The UN believes it, the US believes it; not only did Secretary of State Colin Powell telephone President Omar Bashir to congratulate him, it is ready to end sanctions and strike Sudan from its terrorist list.

The US is in a position to know. It is the catalyst behind the deal. It exerted immense pressure on both sides, but most of it on Khartoum. The Sudan Peace Act, signed into law by President Bush last year, was ruthless in its intentions — aiming to “compel” the Sudanese government to a settlement, democracy and guaranteeing human rights — and draconian in its threats, blacklisting Sudan so that it could get no international aid, ensuring that its nascent oil industry never got off the ground, and raising the possibility of war crimes indictments against officials. Even if the country’s misery had not convinced the government of the need for peace, such threats were enough to bring it to its knees.

Many questions remain, not least whether the south, after the interim period, will opt for independence. There are those who want precisely that. They do not, however, include John Garang. He wants a new, inclusive, pluralist Sudan, not a divide between independent Christian south and Muslim north. There are many in the north who agree with him.

Sudan is a country of immense potential. It has been deprived of that potential almost since independence. Here is a chance to start anew. It may be the last chance. Sudan must grab it.