The African Slap

Editorial, Sudan Tribune

Jan 29, 2007 — The failure of the Sudanese diplomacy to accede to the African Union chairmanship is not only due to Darfur crisis. It is also a question of image. The African leaders were reluctant to choose an Islamist figure, which is described as violent and intolerant, to represent them.

Since the 30 June 1989, the Sudan is internationally isolated. Also, the main concern of the National Islamic Front regime and after of the National Congress Party was and still is to be acceptable in the region and the rest of the world.

After the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the peace deal gave the regime a new legitimacy inside and outside the county. The international community thought that this might be a good start of a radical shit in Khartoum policies. Accordingly, the African leaders agreed to boost this change and to hold the African Union Summit in Khartoum last year. Unfortunately, since the death of Garang and the marginalization of Ali Osman Mohamed Taha, we attend a strong comeback of the “anti peace forces” from the ruling National Congress Prty. The CPA implementation disfigured the peace deal in many aspects not only on Abyei, North South border demarcation or oil revenue sharing. The CPA is supposed the lay down the foundation of Sudan’s democratization, and nothing has been done.

Besides that, Darfur crisis accentuated the ugly face of the ruling party not in term of dishonouring peace agreements but also in term of horrible human rights violations: the daily killing of civilians, rape, attacks against aid workers etc…Here, we do not want to mention the Darfur Peace Agreement of 5 May 2006 because there is no peace in Darfur and it would be a lie to insist on such idea.

Thus, the choice of Ghana is a very good one because this decision “is quite clearly a mark of confidence, a recognition of the fight of my country for democracy, good governance and the fight against poverty.” As it was said by President John Kufuor.

The African slap, also is a good thing for the Sudanese regime. It would remind Khartoum that if world deals with, it is because the regional and international community decided to support peace and democratic reform in the country since the 9 January 2005. Also the regional and international communities do what they can to persuade Khartoum to accept the protection of the civilians in the troubled Darfur region. Since two years the relations with the world are articulated on Darfur crisis. Khartoum adopted inflexible attitude with the AU and the UN. With all that how Khartoum dares and requests the leadership of AU, and how can the African leaders trust a government that clearly rejects AU politics.

Sudanese ruling party should understand that its legitimacy lays on the CPA and the resolution of Darfur crisis. Otherwise, they will continue to be the badly-liked of the international community.