SUDAN: The World should take note

Editorial, the Citizen

June 7, 2007 — As the Sudanese crises drag on and the date for the referendum on Southern self-determination grows closer with popular sentiments in the South clearly in favour of separation from the domestic colonial state that is the Republic of Sudan, the world should take note and careful stock of the fact that not a single movement fighting the National Congress Party regime has as its objective the overthrow of the government and apart from Southern Sudan there is nowhere else in Sudan that popular demand is for secession. This is very important because the situation is unique in post colonial Africa where all armed movements have had as their objective either secession or overthrow of the government. The reasons for this unique situation are essentially two: first of all there is a strong sense of patriotism and Sudanese national identity among all the marginalized peoples of Sudan; secondly, those fighting the NCP are people who are essentially interested in constitutional reforms not merely grabbing power.

Agreed, as NCP acknowledges, though with characteristic insincerity, the Sudanese crises beckon political solutions; and we must not lose sight of the fact that Southern Sudanese, after nearly 50 years of bitter struggle against Khartoum’s domestic colonialism, were thoroughly satisfied with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed with the NCP regime in Nairobi on January 9th, 2005. Unfortunately, the world keeps forgetting or is not sufficiently attentive to the Sudanese situation to bear in mind that in the months following that historic signing up until the tragic death of our national hero, Dr. John Garang de Mabior, the CPA was widely recognized to be the model for settling the other regional crises in Sudan. With the death of the dynamic and charismatically compelling Garang, the elements in NCP who hotly opposed the CPA reasserted their influence with such force that the African Union mediators in Abuja sold out the liberation quest of the Darfur people with an agreement that only made token concessions but basically left the domestic colonization structures in tact. This is why the Darfur Peace Agreement has been a failure; to begin with it was a reluctant concession by the diehard domestic colonialists in the NCP and secondly it fell far short of the aspirations of the Darfur people. The Janjaweed factor in Darfur is sheer exploitation by the NCP regime of the traditional marauders who more than anything else need civilizing and educating. Thus the Janjaweed are unwitting victims of the domestic colonialism maintained by successive regimes in Khartoum, but if one examines the statements of the Darfur liberation leaders regarding them, they are clearly concerned about the rescue and reform of these primitive people who are being ruthlessly exploited by the oligarchs.

Eastern Front went into negotiations with the NCP regime with demands very similar to those of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army and Darfur’s Sudan Liberation Movement, but unfortunately their cause was betrayed by the opportunistic regime in Asmara, which in defense of its own totalitarianism is not interested in seeing modern democracy spread in the region. In fact, the Asmara regime, which was initially opposed to political Islam, has now evidently come to the conclusion that political Islam, which veers towards totalitarianism, is preferable to the spread of modern democracy. The net result in the East has been that, as in Darfur, popular aspirations have been betrayed.

Now that Sudan’s Ambassador Abdel Mahmoud Abdel Halim has been made chairman of the United Nations General Assembly’s special political committee which is concerned with decolonization issues, the other members of the General Assembly should force the issue of domestic colonialism in Sudan before the committee with reference to the fact that Sudan’s liberation movements are not after overthrowing the Sudanese government or secession, but essentially want what SPLM got in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which is an end to domestic colonialism with its oligarchic structure. In other words, equitable power sharing, wealth sharing and a protective stake in the national security arrangements, as well as at least proportionate representation in the civil service.

Also, we want to say to France’s new president Nicolas Sarkozy who made it clear during his campaign that he would move to stop the genocide in Darfur, unless the CPA is held up as the reference for finally ending the Sudanese crises, the domestic colonialism status quo shall continue to prevail and indeed meet violent resistance. We shall go from one peace agreement to the other with no real settlement on the ground. The world must take note of the fact that only Southern Sudan is at peace with its peace deal, though the NCP regime continues to sponsor primitive terrorist militias in the South to create instability.

Finally, the world must table in all concerned international forums consideration of the fact that despite the neo-fascist intransigence of the NCP regime, none of the movements advocates its overthrow but all are looking forward to elections and a new constitutional arrangement. In this regard, free and fair elections, as well as amnesty to participate in the campaigning and elections for all political exiles are essentials that must be duly supported by the international community. This is to say, moreover, that supporting the liberation movements is not colluding in destabilization of Sudan or overthrow of its government, but promotion of compromises that would finally stabilize and bring a bright future to this potentially great African country.