Sudanese opposition stress serious reserves over the Abyei American proposition
By Mahgoub El Tigani
KHARTOUM, March 25, 2004 (Sudan Tribune) — The Democratic Unionist Party DUP leading member, Ali Mahmoud Hassanein, expressed serious reserves towards the US proposal over Abyei saying that “the suggested delay of peace agreement on Abyei might transform the region to a Sudanese Cashmere in a new North-South war.”
Under the U.S. proposal for Abyei, people living in the area would vote in a referendum at the end of six-year transition period with the choice of becoming part of the southern region of Bahr el-Ghazal or retaining “special administrative” status. During the interim period, the region would have representatives in state legislatures in West Kordofan in the north and Bahr el-Ghazal in the south, as well as its own locally elected council.
Hassanein explained to the Doha based al-Bayan newspaper yesterday that Government and SPLA’s insistence to resolve the Abyei question before the other issues “is de facto border demarcation between two states, one in the north and another in the south.”
Affirming his party’s consistent support of the option of unity, the DUP leader anticipated the right of self-determination “will lead to a preference of separation since most of the Kenya signed agreements reinforce this option.”
Abyie requires a real stand to investigate the geography, history, present time and future prospects of the region to decide where it should go:”All of the signed agreements, however, have been imposed upon the negotiating parties by the US administration. They do not represent a voluntary choice of the Sudanese political forces,” ascertained the DUP executive committee member.
Apart from opposition parties, Sudanese civil society groups have strongly opposed the IGAD-US exclusionary drive to finalize a bilateral peace agreement between the Sudanese government and the SPLM/A without full participation by the other Sudanese major parties and civil society groups, (see Sudan Tribune analytical articles and human rights statements in this concern).
Many observers believe that the bilateral agreements on wealth sharing and security arrangements during the interim period without resolving the major national issue of religion, national identity and democracy are basically aimed to create a new state in southern Sudan.
“Were the opportunity equally offered for all Sudanese political forces in the peace negotiations, the Sudanese would not need external solutions,” confirmed DUP Hasanein.
In a new development of opposition stands, the Ummah Party issued a statement appreciating the US proposal on Abyei. However, the party pointed out “negative points in the US proposal, which resolved some problems and gave rise to others.” The party asked for the talks on Abyei to be suspended “until more suitable time”, the independent Al-Ayyam reported today.
The American approach to the Sudan’s Crisis has been further criticized by the Communist Party spokesman Yousif Hussain, according to Al-Bayan. The communists suggest that the Abyie residents “should be granted self-rule to govern their region. A referendum might then be organized for the inhabitants to decide where to belong.”
Yousif stressed his party’s concerns for the unity of Sudan and the national wealth of the country. “The unity of the country is the biggest safeguard of its development. There should be fair distribution of the revenue, gold or oil, to develop infrastructure of the regions where these minerals exist,” said the communist leader.
The Turabi-led Moutamar Al-Shabi party criticized the American proposal on Abyei because it “opens the road to a tribal race for wealth acquisition,” according to Bashir Adam Rahama. The Dinka-Ngok and Misairiya Arabs who have been peacefully living for hundreds of years in the region “should decide upon the Abyie future in a conference by their own delegates.”