Myths and misinformation as NCP survival tactics
By Abdelrauof A. El-Faki & Mahmoud A. Suleiman
December 4, 2008 — The ruling National Congress Party (NCP) in Sudan did not leave any stratagem in its quest for a way out for their beleaguered president Field Marshal Omer Hassan Ahmed al-Basher from his dilemma with the ICC. Field Marshal Omer al-Bashir and his National Congress Party (NCP) bigwigs such as the utterly insensitive diehard Nafie Ali Nafie, the leader of the hard-line faction in the ruling National Congress Party and a close presidential adviser, have been orchestrating two great myths: one around an expected democratic transformation that the General Elections could bring when carried out duly, on July 2009 as stipulated by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA/Naivasha Agreement) of 2005, while the other myth is on the possible disastrous consequences to the country as a whole in the event the ICC Chamber judges formally indict president al-Basher on the charges submitted in mid-July 2008 by the ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo who filed 10 charges: three counts of genocide, five crimes against humanity and two of murder and accused al-Bashir of masterminding a campaign to get rid of the African tribes in Darfur; Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa. Sudanese officials have given ample threats since July 2008 on an upcoming “tsunami” in the region if the arrest warrant is issued, as the Sudanese justice minister Abd-al-Basit Sabdarat strongly put it. Similar assertions have been resounded by those with whom the NCP enjoys cosy relationship such as the African Union (AU) president who warned that power vacuum and widespread anarchy in Sudan will ensue if the International Criminal Court (ICC) indicts President Omer al-Bashir. As expected, the Arab League is of the same mind – especially if it means ICC involvement in Arab affairs. The Djibouti Foreign Minister Mahmoud Ali Yousif says: “The indictment sets a dangerous precedent in dealing with heads of states. It will have dangerous repercussions, not only for Sudan but also for the whole region.” Furthermore, the loudest cheerleaders for the support of al-Bashir such as the African Union (AU) and the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) also wish the ICC would not involve itself in their dirty laundry”. In a statement perversely contrary to what one expects, the Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who has gotten high points from the West for management of his country’s post-genocide economy, recently said the ICC is a new form of imperialism created by the West to control the world’s poorest countries! Nancy Langer, the Director of External Relations at the Henry L. Stimson Center, writes under the title “ICC Indictment of Sudan’s al-Bashir Will Test Court’s Relevancy” and quoting what Alex de Waal, the Darfur-watcher, wondered and asked “Will this (ICC indictment of al-Bashir) be a historic victory for human rights … or will it be a tragedy, a clash between the needs for justice and for peace, which will send Sudan into a vortex of turmoil and bloodshed?”! The defiant and seemingly unrepentant President al-Bashir, according to reporters, shows no signs of losing political support. Moreover, the complex conflicts of Darfur and Eastern Sudan, in addition to mounting tensions with the South SPLA/M concerning implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreements (CPA), and a new conflict that erupted in northern provinces resisting unpopular dam constructions on the Nile, the poor governance of the NIF theocratic-military rule produced continuous disruptions between the partners in the Government of National Unity (GNU) on one hand, and the Sudanese grass-roots, the United Nations, the ICC and the International Community on the other.
Before one starts to debunk the above scare mongering and the survival myths of the regime, one would like at the outset to put into words that nobody denies the fact that Sudan is in an urgent need for the long-waited democratic transformation under the current totalitarian NCP regime. Needless to say, transparent, free and fair general election is the only legitimate means for that end. But such elections need an array of prerequisites, ranging from the freedom of the press and the repealing of the infamous national security law to other equally important issues such as the timing of elections and peace-building. We should only recall that the population census had been marred by irregularities from its beginning to the end, thereby raising grave concerns. Would the forthcoming elections face a similar fate?
Sudan’s recent history has a lot to offer by way of an answer to this question, particularly the transitional and elected governments of April 1985-89: they were loaded with the heavy burden (Legacy) of 17 years of repression by the Nimeiri junta, and the ravages of the war in the southern part of the country. They failed to sustain the momentum of the March/April Popular Uprising (1985) that paved the way for a more decent life. The transitional government held a remarkably free and transparent national election, yet the coalition government that followed could not hold together and failed gravely to deliver the goods. That state of affairs hastened and opened the gate for The NIF counter-revolution, i.e., the present Ingaz or Salvation regime. Thus the high expectations that such a successful general election would lead up to a democratic transformation turned to disillusionment. Why did the 1985/86 elections lead up to nothing? A cursory observation shows that there was a missing element in that so-called democratic transformation and that element was peace: the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/SPLM) took no part in the elections despite the fact that it played a significant role in hastening the demise of Nimeiri dictatorship. Hence it was the escalating civil war that defined the future of the fledgling democracy. Within a period of few months the armed forces, and consequently the democratic coalition, were immensely shaken by the successive blows inflicted by the SPLA. The meager financial resources at the disposal of the coalition government were dissipated in the protracted civil war in the south, with devastating consequences on the economy. Unrest eventually grew among both the armed forces and the people at the grass-roots. The armed forces went to the unprecedented point of issuing a memorandum to the coalition government, threatening to take action. It was that memorandum that paved the way for the army to stage its bloodless coup on June 1989. Lesson one: Elections (or democracy) have no meaning without peace.
Then there is the second myth which says that indictment of president al-Bashir will throw the country into utter chaos. Once again we turn to recent history to show the vacuity of these claims: let us look at how peace unfolded in Bosnia in the mid 1990s, following a devastating civil war that left thousands dead. As James Smith argues in the New Statesman (17 July 2008): “indictments can sideline opponents to a peace: arrest warrants helped remove hardliners from Bosnia’s peace process [thus a lasting solution was duly achieved]”. Of course he refers to the likes of the Former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic and the war fugitive Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic. The authors of this article agree with Smith that the ICC’s immediate impact on the Darfur peace process will be minimal because actually over the last “two years there has been neither peace nor process”. We would even venture to go further to argue that indictment of al-Bashir is more likely to speed up the stalled peace process. As for the impact on southern Sudan, obviously the NCP has scaled down its provocations and escalation since July 14 (the date Ocampo filed the charges against al-Bashir). Lesson two: justice is the road to a lasting peace. There should be no trade-off between peace and justice. Rogue leaders threats of further violence and instability do not hold much water for they amount to desperate and wicked attempts to thwart justice.
Dr. Abdelrauof Adam El-Faki is the Deputy Head of Bureau for Training and Strategic Planning of JEM
Dr. Mahmoud A. Suleiman is the Deputy Chairman of the General Congress for Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). He can be reached at Mahmoud.abaker@Gmail. Com