In the case of South Sudan, for its 2016-17 budget exercise, the Government of South Sudan has decided to spend almost half of its budget on the acquisition of military equipment and the payment of the soldiers who are currently fighting this war. If my memory is not mistaken, only about 20% or less was going to education and even less, something like 4% to health services.
The international community has allowed the Government of South Sudan to continue to buy weapons throughout this war, and they have done just that. They have recently received fighter jets from Ukraine that were flown into Uganda before being transferred into South Sudan. New weapons and ammunition are always coming in, and they do this perfectly legally. Canada has imposed its own arms embargo on South Sudan. The EU has done the same, but for the moment there is no international arms embargo on South Sudan.
Although it is highly likely that the government and the opposition would be able to procure weapons and ammunitions through underground channels, we think that the imposition of an arms embargo would heighten the cost of this war effort and make it more expensive for them to acquire weapons and equipment. It would also send a strong signal to the effect that after four years of abuses, after four years perpetrating a war through extremely abusive methods, there are consequences. For now, the international community has failed to do that, despite threatening to do so. This has decreased its deterrence capacity in South Sudan. By not following up with threats at some point, people feel as though the threats will never come. They feel as though they can continue their business as they do, and the abuses continue.