Baath party rejects FFC-military agreement restoring civil govt in Sudan
October 11, 2022 (KHARTOUM) – The Sudanese Baath Party rejected the ongoing negotiations between the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC) and the coup leaders on a political agreement that restores civilian rule, stressing that it serves the interests of the military component.
The FFC and the military component have been negotiating a political agreement since last week after a meeting between the commander-in-chief of the Sudanese army, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, his deputy, Mohamed Hamdan Daglo “Hemetti”, commander of the Rapid Support Forces, and FFC delegation including al-Wathiq al-Berair, Babikir Faisal and Taha Osman.
The meetings, which took place as a result of efforts of the QUAD diplomats and the Trilateral Mechanism, agreed to adopt the draft transitional constitution prepared by the Bar Association as a basis for negotiation.
The proposed constitutional text calls for the non-participation of the army in power and limits its role to the national defence and security council.
Sudan Tribune learned that the FFC groups held internal consultation meetings at the level of the leadership and intermediary cadres to discuss the agreement before announcing the agreement and mobilizing public opinion to support it.
On Tuesday evening, Adil Khalafalla, spokesman for the Arab Socialist Baath Party, posted a tweet declaring their rejection of any agreement with the military component that preserves the interests of the coup leaders who are “about to fall.”
“The (reached) settlement is a project to save the coup from falling and to prolong its duration. Also, it contradicts the aspirations of the people, their suffering and sacrifices,” Khalafalla said.
He further called to topple the deal “through the broadest popular front peacefully”.
Several sources close to the negotiations spoke to Sudan Tribune about the opposition the deal faces within several FFC groups but said the agreement is generally accepted.
However, they predicted the defection of the Baath party from the FFC political coalition because of the settlement, joining the Communist Party and allied factions.
Meanwhile, international facilitators are pushing to announce the agreement before new demonstrations on the anniversary of the October 21 popular uprising or the first anniversary of the military coup on October 25, fearing that any killing of protesters will complicate the scene and cancel the agreement.
Signs of disagreement between Burhan and Hemetti have already emerged in public, despite repeated denials from both sides.
The RSF commander criticizes Burhan for his alleged alliance with the cadres and organizations of the former regime which are hostile to Hemetti.
Observers point out that Hemetti no longer goes to his office in the Republican Palace and receives his guests at his home in Khartoum. Also, the arrival of the Rizeigattes tribal leaders in Khartoum and their announcement of their support for Hemetti is further evidence of this disagreement.
Burhan meets the facilitation panel
Al-Burhan met on Tuesday with members of the tripartite facilitation mechanism to discuss the solutions put forward and the results of negotiations between the Sudanese parties.
In a statement after the end of the meeting, Mohamed Belaiche of the African Union said that the meeting with Burhan was frank and expressed the desire to reach a political agreement that ends the current crisis.
Belaiche further stressed that the political settlement should be “engineered by the stakeholders themselves and on the basis of the broadest possible consensus”.
The features of the agreement have not yet been announced.
But sources said that the pro-coup groups no longer insist on a 25% percentage in the upcoming cabinet. While the FFC are willing to accept the involvement of the Democratic Unionist Party of Mohamed Osman al-Mirghani, which supports Burhan and the Islamist Popular Congress Party.
Burhan had previously announced on July 4 that the military component has no intention to participate in a transitional government but demanded a Supreme Council of the Armed Forces that would have some sovereign powers besides national security and defence.
On the other hand, the FFC demand the full withdrawal of the military component from the political process and limits its role to security and defence sectors through a national security council headed by the civilian prime minister.