Wednesday, July 17, 2024

Sudan Tribune

Plural news and views on Sudan

Sudanese presidential aide says peace deal possible within two months

By Al-Sharq al-Awsat London-based daily newspaper

KHARTOUM, Nov 21, 2003 — The Sudanese presidential assistant, Mubarak al-Fadil al-Mahdi, has said it is a good sign that the [rebel] SPLM [Sudan People’s Liberation Movement] is holding on to the three disputed territories [Abyei, the Nuba Mountains, southern Blue Nile] in the north, noting this shows the SPLM’s commitment to the country’s unity.

In an interview with Al-Sharq al-Awsat, Al-Fadil said it was natural for the SPLM to try to keep these areas because they fell within the area of [SPLM] military operations and some SPLM commanders actually came from these regions. He pointed out the reason behind the SPLM raising this issue stemmed from its wish to develop closer ties with people from rural areas.

He explained: “It is not true that the SPLM wishes to extend its control northwards. A more accurate explanation is that the movement wishes to expand its influence as a political organization. Its political platform includes defending the interests of the country’s less developed and neglected areas.

Al-Fadil supported the SPLM’s demand to hold free elections in the middle of the transitional period. He pointed out that the purpose of the meetings between leaders of various Sudanese political parties and John Garang, was to ensure they would play roles in the post-peace era.

Al-Fadil, who is the leader of the[opposition] Ummah Party [UP]’s Reform and Renewal wing, remarked it was difficult to unite the two wings and said he preferred them to coordinate their positions at this time rather than trying to unite. He described his party’s alliance with the ruling National Congress [NC] as a strategic alliance rather than a temporary one.

Commenting on the Darfur [western Sudan] incidents, Al-Fadil denied that either Libya or Chad had intervened. He also denied the Darfur fighters [presumably the SLM/A Sudan Liberation Movement/ Army] were linked to Garang’s movement but noted that the SPLM naturally benefitted from any a war of attrition in the country’s other regions.

Following is the text of the interview:

[Al-Hasan] How is the peace process going?

[Al-Fadil] I believe that peace involves something more than mere negotiations and the signing of protocols. Peace reflects a willingness and a conviction on the part of the parties concerned about ending their conflict. The government and the SPLM have such a conviction and are willing to make peace. Regional and international parties also wish to end an era of struggle and are helping the Sudanese parties to make peace.

The general framework of the peace was concluded on 20 July 2002 in Machakos [eastern Kenya]. Concerning the most difficult obstacles, an agreement on security arrangements was concluded in Naivasha [west of Nairobi] on 26 September. As to the three other unsettled issues, namely, the three disputed regions, the natural resources, and political power, they were discussed and agreements were signed on many of their aspects.

[Al-Hasan] Why does the SPLM insist on raising the issue of the three regions, which are part of northern Sudan in accordance with the 1907 borders demarcation.

[Al-Fadil] I believe that the fact that the SPLM is talking about areas in northern Sudan is a good sign. This means there will be no more talk about northern Sudan and southern Sudan. It indicates the wish to reaching a comprehensive solution in the context of a united Sudan. [Passage omitted on why the SPLM is holding on to the three regions] .

[Al-Hasan] Do you not agree with some observers that the SPLM wishes to expand northwards?

[Al-Fadil] I do not believe the SPLM wants to expand northwards. A proper interpretation of its action is that it wishes to extend its influence as a political organization, not to expand the territory at the expenses of either the south or the north.[Passage omitted on SPLM’s concern on rural and less developed areas]

[Al-Hasan] Is it practical to expect that a comprehensive and just peace can be signed within two months?

[Al-Fadil] There is nothing to prevent this from happening. If the two sides can overcome the remaining obstacles and cut time short, they need to settle the pending issues, then the signing of an agreement is possible.

[Al-Hasan] Are you talking about the possibility of signing an agreement in accordance with the call made by President Bush?

[Al-Fadil] It is clear that the international community would like to see a peace agreement being reached soon. There is a specific timetable, which is designed to encourage the two sides to reach a peace settlement. President Bush called on the two sides to sign the agreement by the end of December 2003. He told the US Congress that he would submit a report on this issue in mid-January 2004.

[Al-Hasan] Will a meeting be held between the first vice- president, Ali [Uthman Muhammad] Taha and the SPLM leader, John Garang, before the beginning of the next round of negotiations?

[Al-Fadil] The two sides originally agreed that a meeting would be held in between the two rounds of negotiations, but the IGAD [Inter-Governmental Authority on Development] Secretariat intervened and said this was not appropriate and meetings needed preparation.

For this reason, the second meeting was replaced by a telephone conversation between the two sides. Dr. Garang telephoned President Umar al-Bashir and Vice-President Taha. They held consultations over the next round of negotiations which are scheduled to resume on 30 November.

[Al-Hasan] Do you think the expected meetings between Garang, the [opposition] Ummah Party leader, Sadiq al-Mahdi, and [opposition] PNC [Popular National Congress] leader Hasan al-Turabi will promote unity or rather the opposite?

[Al-Fadil] As far as I know, a call was made to hold a meeting of the NDA [National Democratic Alliance] in Rumbek [southern Sudan] after the Id al-Fitr [end of Ramadan].

The SPLM also sent an invitation to Sadiq al-Mahdi to visit Rumbek. These are mainly political moves and are motivated by the concern over arrangements and alliances in the coming phase, especially as the country will have to handle the issues of elections, government, constitution, and others.

These parties, in effect, are trying to ensure they will have roles to play during the coming phase.

[Al-Hasan] Is the establishment of a national unity government likely to be set up during the coming phase?

[Al-Fadil] According to the Machakos agreement between the government and the SPLM, a broad-based government will be formed for the transitional six-year period. During this period, most of the political power will be in the hands of the NC and the SPLM for reasons linked with the implementation of the agreement and the situation in the country.

Additionally, the NC, due to its history in the government, will have the upper hand and with its other partners it is moving towards pluralism and democracy. Similarly, the SPLM is turning itself from a military force into a political movement. During the transitional period both parties will prepare for the general elections which will be impartial and free and under international supervision.

[Al-Hasan] Will the UP Reform and Renewal Wing be in favour of speeding-up the elections’ date after a comprehensive peace agreement is reached?

[Al-Fadil] Al-Ummah Party agrees with the view held by mediators that a consolidation period of 18-24 months is necessary to pave the way to general elections. There is no doubt that moving from a war situation to peace requires preparation. Certainly a period of 2-3 years sounds reasonable before general elections are held during the transitional period.

[Al-Hasan] According to some reports, efforts are underway to unite the two UP wings? What are the facts?

[Al-Fadil] In our Reform and Renewal wing, we call for political unity and urge the establishment to set up a broad national front which would bring together all the political forces so as to promote democracy and the peaceful transfer of power.

What is even more important, is to have political stability in the country.

As for the UP unification, UP groups are making efforts to achieve unity and have made great progres, but their position clashes with the one of the secretary general.

They contacted us and we blessed their efforts. We exchanged ideas. In our wing we have a new organizational structure that has allowed a new generation to take over responsibility. We have no fewer than 30 cadres which occupy ministerial and administrative positions in the country. We have 18 provincial ministers and 10 ministers in the central government. This means that our second- tier cadres have taken over the leadership. For this reason a merger or unification of the party’s two wings appears to be difficult. An easier option is for the party’s two wings to coordinate their positions on political matters. This, however, should not totally preclude the hope of a merger or unification if circumstances are right.

[Al-Hasan] Is the alliance between the UP Reform and Renewal wing and the ruling NC either an temporary or a strategic alliance?

[Al-Fadil] It is a strategic alliance because it lies on the issue of peace, democratic transformation, and the building of the state on constitutional foundations. These are strategic, not temporary issues.

[Al-Hasan] What about your relations with the SPLM?

[Al-Fadil] Our relationship with the SPLM began in 1989. It was crowned with the February 1990 agreement and turned into a charter in 1994. Based on these charters and on our membership in the NDA, the Asmara conference was held in June 1994 and issued the Asmara Declaration.

We are determined to develop this relationship in the context of a united Sudan and within the framework of the post-peace political scene. Our UP wing and the SPLM will hold a meeting in Nairobi next month to discuss bilateral relations, peace, and post-peace arrangements.

[Al-Hasan] What is the reason for the absence of channels of communication between the UP Reform and Renewal wing and the Arab capitals?

[Al-Fadil] We have ongoing contacts with Cairo, especially as Egypt has now become more closely associated with the peace issue in Sudan.

As with contacts with other Arab countries, these have not stopped. We met official and popular delegations that visited Khartoum.

The Reform and Renewal wing is interested in promoting Arab solidarity and cooperation and believes the right way to do this is economic cooperation, the exchange of benefits, and an open-border policy to allow interaction among the various Arab populations.

Today’s world is governed by economic and technological development. Hence we need to learn from past experience and from Europe’s own experience to develop strong inter-Arab relations.

[Al-Hasan] Which party stands behind the recent bloody incidents in Darfur in western Sudan?

[Al-Fadil] The cause of this conflict goes back to certain events which began in 1983 and were compounded by desertification, drought, migration, conflict over water resources, and smuggling of weapons across the border. Conflicts developed among various groups in that region. The decision to dissolve the local administration at one point had a negative impact on the region and left an administrative, legal, and judicial vacuum.

The political conflict there took a new direction as a result of tribal conflicts. The recent moves by the state and contacts with the concerned parties helped to contain the volatile situation.

Recent agreements provided for the disarming of conflicting groups, separating the combatants, placing them in different locations away from each other, and finding alternatives to the struggle. There is a strong determination to establish security there first, to strengthen the local administration, and give it administrative and judicial powers.

[Al-Hasan] Is there any foreign intervention in Darfur, for example from the neighbouring states of Libya and Chad?

[Al-Fadil] I think the aid given to the various Darfur tribes came from sister tribes living across the border in Chad and Libya, but the Libyan and Chadian governments did not play a role in Darfur’s sedition. They did not intervene.

[Al-Hasan] Did the SPLM play a role in provoking the Darfur incidents?

[Al-Fadil] There was no connection between the SPLM and the Darfur incidents. However, the SPLM benefits from the attrition brought forward by other groups. This is natural.

BBC Monitoring Africa

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *