SPLM’s dilemma in Sudan’s unity government
By Amir Idris
May 5, 2006 — Ten of thousands of protesters gathered in Washington DC on Sunday, April 30th 2006 as part of a national rally to end genocide in Darfur. They came from different cultural and religious backgrounds to voice their concerns and express support for innocent women, children and elders being brutalized by the government of the Sudan. The rally was a celebration of humanity in its finest moment. It was a rejection of discrimination, racism and enslavement.
Since the political violence erupted in 2003, it is estimated that more than 300,000 people have died in Darfur, more than two million have been displaced and countless others are suffering from hunger and disease. Of course, the first genocide of the 21st century is a product of the National Congress Party’s (NCP) policy of racism and discrimination. This policy has been used first in Southern Sudan for decades which led to the death of more than two millions and the displacement of four millions Southerners.
When the SPLM/A and NCP formed the Government of National Unity (GONU) after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in January 2005, many Sudanese and non-Sudanese expected the GONU to change the policy of racism to equality and justice. This wishful thinking and expectations has quickly turned into disappointments and frustrations. Sadly, the GONU continues to speak the language of death and destruction, and the presence of the SPLM seems to have had no impact on the decision making process of the new government. Instead, the SPLM/A’s performance in GONU is marked by confusion and disarray. In Southern Sudan, for instance, the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) has yet to transform the Southern region into a liveable place governed by law and order. The South continues to be paralyzed by ethnic conflicts, and still lacks functioning democratic institutions.
The GONU indeed fails to address the historical and political causes of the Sudan’s tragedy. The GONU continues to operate through violence which is deeply embedded in the structure of the Sudanese state that was created in 16th century. Slavery, ethnic cleansing, and displacement are strategies used by the ruling group in Khartoum to enforce the policy of Islamization and Arabization in the entire country. Consequently, the country continues to suffer from its old ills: ongoing genocide in Darfur, ethnic conflicts in the South, low level political violence in the East, and racist motivated attacks against displaced Southern Sudanese in Khartoum. Sadly, the presence of ineffective and powerless SPLM’s representatives in the GONU has neither helped the NCP nor the SPLM to gain the political and moral support from the international community.
The conflict in Darfur is described by the United States as genocide, but the GONU does not seem to take the global campaign to end the genocide seriously. Ironically, some within the SPLM seem to believe that the conflict in Darfur is not going to impact the future of Southern Sudan. On the contrary, I would argue that the continuation of the conflict in Darfur will only frustrate any political and economic attempts to rebuild the South. In fact, the international community has continued to view the government of Sudan as a violator of human rights and a sponsor of terrorism.
Until recently, the SPLM/A has been known as a national liberation movement, a driving force for fundamental change for the whole country. In fact, the notion of New Sudan, first articulated by the late Dr. John Garang, is seen by many Sudanese and non-Sudanese as a critique of the old Sudan. This new vision indeed promised a new country based on equality, freedom and justice for all: citizenship rather than place of origin. People from all parts of the Sudan, including people of Darfur, have embraced this promising vision that will ultimately change Sudan forever.
Therefore, the SPLM/A has a historic responsibility to protect and to address the injustices that are being inflicted on other marginalized people, particularly the people of Darfur. But this can only be done if and only if, the SPLM/A begins to distance itself from the genocidal policy of the NCP, and embrace a humanistic vision that can enable the GONU to end the genocide in Darfur. Short of this, history may not judge the SPLM/A as a national liberator but only as a passive partner.
* Amir Idris, Assistant Professor of African Studies, Dept. of African & African American Studies, Fordham University, New York City, U.S.A. Email: [email protected]