Khartoum’s dilemma: defiance or compliance

By Nyuol Justin Yaac

Oct 3, 2006 — Over the recent past, different leaders, from different countries, with different ideologies have traveled to Sudan: From UN Kofi Anan to US State Secretary Rice, all in the hopes of beseeching the regime in Khartoum for its intransigence over the deployment of the blue helmets to the western part of the country, Darfur.

This attempt of shuttle diplomacy has however turned into a grammar of bellicosity. With more rigidity, the UN maintains that, the Sudan government lacks the wherewithal to contain the denied genocide; and therefore, under the notion of “responsibility to protect,” they will go into the region without the approval of the government, they (UN) have insisted so by passing resolution 1706 that mandates them to precisely carryout the duty. The U.N has also issued a new deadline, supposedly the end of the year— these extra times are suppose to allow the NCP alter its position, or, at least, beguile them to comply with the exigencies of the U.N. In Khartoum, however, the government adamantly rejects the deployment of a UN force to Darfur: the façade, “National Security” is threatened; and in the name of self-defense, they will resist any forces determined to intervened even via military confrontation, if necessary, President Bashir’s exhortation, “Darfur will be a stream of a blood, if the UN doesn’t adhere to our policies,” not only that, he also assured and warned the U.N. of abashedly losing a war like the Israelis did in Lebanon, if they attempt to carry out the move.

But, amidst the diplomatic schism, the SPLM which happens to be part of the political equation of the Sudan has sat on a different terrain from that of its peace partners, the NCP. The SPLM has acquiesced to UN’s demands, insisting that the deployment of blue helmets to Darfur is not any different from the already existing ones in the southern part of the country. This deadlock occurs at a precarious time, indeed, shocking a few bad apples within the GoNU; however, it shouldn’t be perturbing as such, because, all this does is, portrayal of a wider web of the recurring political chasm inherent within Sudan’s political sphere.

But since, focusing on the split decision between the NCP/SPLM proves meaningless: it’s more fruitful drawing attention on NCPs psychopathic gamble on this contested issue. In Khartoum, the international communities’ demands have fallen on deaf ears, why? Because of two factors considered detrimental to the mighty forces of the U.N: First of all, Hamas’s self-proclaimed victory over Israel’s incursions has had a tremendous impact on the psyche of NCPs coroners; and according to them, they will resist the mighty forces of the U.N and easily defeat them, this is conspicuously divulged in Bashir’s vacuous statement, “the infidels will be dealt a huge blow, just like they did in Lebanon should they attack any other Muslim lands.” Also a boost to this intuition is the fact that, the U.S., which happens to be the driving force behind the U.N., and in particular, a big supporter of resolution 1706 is caught up in Iraq, overstretched in Afghanistan, and busy taking on north Korea and Iran on the nuclear issue; Khartoum has noted this—and shrewdly— taken advantage of the situation without comprehending, the gamble they are embarking on is a political suicide, whose corollary is the obliteration of the regime itself.

Also amusing is, NCPs pretext of resisting foreign occupiers—supposedly the blue helmets— behind the facade of “national security,” making this political platitude, is of course ironical because the NCP is a government, more than anything else, concerned with “regime survival, and not national security, as they would like the disenchanted citizens to belief .”

Under pressure to abandon the incursions in Darfur, the NCP is taking advantage of SPLMs reputation and the CPA to salvage its image as well as to veil its ill intentions from the international community. The SPLM, more clairvoyant, has recognized this subterfuge, and prudently avoided the trap, they responded by taking sides with the international community: a move that really offended the NCP, but… Hey! that’s how ‘real politiks’ works—gleaning and making decisions that fit your interests, a move coterminous to NCPs current mobilization, which doesn’t perpetuate nor serve the few existing ones.

The stance the SPLM has taken may not be the best move thus far, but it is certainly the right move to take. Even though, this may invoke some nemesis, at this time, that’s less important than the SPLM calling a spade a spade, rather than a spoon.

The deadlock over the SPLM making a holy alliance with the NCP should not be a major concern, in fact, what ought to be of significant importance is, what this impasse means not only for the SPLM, but for Sudan as a whole?

This is a unique situation for the SPLM, because it presents itself as a Catch-22, which culminates into a war at worse or hostile relations at best, and neither is optimistic. First of all, should the SPLM jump into Khartoum’s band wagon and go for a ride with them, then, they invariably get pulled into a war that has nothing to do with them: on the other hand should they go against Khartoum’s demands—as they have done—then they get accused of being blasphemous; because according to Khartoum, the CPA regards both parties to contribute and work together to maintain and protect the country. But, as refined as the rhetoric sounds, there is a carefully crafted cache to it—the cache is, those contributions entail military action, if necessary. But more incisive, should the SPLM maintain its position, then, the regime in Khartoum will either view them as an enemy for not helping protect the country, or, a pariah that deserves to be further ostracized, hence severed relations.

This of course is a dire situation not only for the SPLM, but also for Sudan as a whole. A lot of people like to speculate the indifference in terms of north/south relations; but, the issue is more complex than that.

History attests that in the past, the creation of north/south alliances has often proved disastrous, or treacherous, and in most cases resulting in ignominious subjugation of the southerners by their own kind. This time, the southerners more poised than ever before, will not allow former deceitful acts manifest in different forms thus distracting the serenity of this contemporaneous times.

What is unheeding, or what the NCP does not understand is the fact that, the SPLM has no enemies apart from those undermining the CPA; nor does it know of forces threatening national security, apart from those making the demarcation of borders difficult— after all! What territory is being threatened, if it’s not even demarcated? The SPLM and the NCP never did and never will disagree over the issue of protecting national security; but, that does not mean, they cannot disagree over the interpretation of the notion of national security. While to the former, national security means protecting citizens, even if it means utilizing external forces; to the latter, national security means intimidating the citizens to adhere to government policies irrespective of their intrinsic exclusionary tactic.

But, the days of living in self denial, or, the days of optimistic utopianism are long gone, and if the NCP does not comply with the international community, then the SPLM will have to keep distancing itself from them, not because they hate the north, but, because they love the south.

The NCP is at a dark crossroad, it has to make a choice: comply with the international community and maintain the regimes status quo, but loss face to its fundamentalists base, or, defy the international community, and not only face the demise or collapse of the entire regime, but also endure a humiliating “run over” as the world witnesses. For Khartoum, there is still time to reflect and make a coherent choice. The end of the year is a crucial time for Khartoum, as this is the time when their leadership as well as their rationality will be tested.

* The author of this article is a Sudanese, currently residing in Canada; he can be reached at: [email protected]