Sudan Elections Fallout: A reminder of history of violence
By Steve Paterno
April 11, 2010 — The long anticipated Sudanese general elections due to take place this month is already a failed event. When the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed, it was based on assumption that halfway through an interim period of six years; a general election will be carried out, with the purpose of transforming Sudan into a democratic nation.
However, the assumption envisioned in CPA for a democratic transformation of Sudan, can only be in paper. The hope of conducting a free and fair elections in Sudan began to indicate troubling signs from the start when no serious efforts were exerted to show proper implementations of the CPA. The major partner to the CPA, the National Congress Party (NCP), plays the role of spoiler to an agreement it signed. Political power, economic resources, and national security apparatus largely remain in tact, under the control of the NCP. The junior partner to the CPA, the Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM), has proven to be not a real formidable challenger to NCP as previously thought during the signing of the SPLM. The SPLM at best abandoned the national cause and decided to reluctantly retreat to South Sudan. The international community that supposes to play significant role in the implementation process applied no pressure against the responsible parties for their lack of implementing the CPA. Left out in all these are the once powerful political parties, now on the opposition without any power.
With lack of proper implementations of CPA, the NCP has prevailed by proving that it will not lose power through free and fair elections as there will be no any elections at all to that effect. The SPLM, which the NCP frustrated all its effort in the implementation process of the CPA, has finally decided to settle for the control of South Sudan—work its referendum and eventual independence due early next year.
The traditionally northern Sudanese parties are not only losers in this equation but the scenarios created two major sets of problems for them: one, they cannot get the power they desperately need, and two, South Sudan is destined for secession—a move vehemently oppose by the northern political parties. These parties are trying to gain power by all means necessary and possibly hope to eventually avert the secession of South Sudan. They have already withdrawn from participating in any elections, because they have no chances of winning. They claim that by withdrawing from elections activities, they will be more prepared for an upraising to be carried right after the elections.
Historically, in critical moments like this, northern political parties always come together, united to agree on something; the issue of South Sudan. In 1958, when South Sudan was nearly on a verge of achieving a federated status through a constitutional process, an elected northern government decided to hand power over to a military dictator. The main aim was to crash the Southern Sudanese aspiration by military means. Since then, all the subsequent northern regimes that came to power, resolve to violently suppress any of South Sudan aspirations, including the current regime of Omar al-Bashir, which came into power with objective of a military solution for South Sudan.
This time around, the situation appears different. It seems a northern ruling regime, for lust of clinging to power, is not willing to give-in to the demands of the other northern political parties on the issue of South Sudan . The first priority of the ruling regime in Khartoum is to remain in power and the issue of South Sudan is relegated to the second row. Ironically, this is also the same order of priorities of the opposition northern political parties. Therefore, it is apparent that the northern political parties are heading for a collision course as they are set to clash among themselves for power. Hopefully, after emerging from their bitter rivalries, they will then realize that the issue of South Sudan is already out of their hands. The SPLM move to concentrate much of its efforts in the South in securing self determination is a judicious move at this critical juncture. Otherwise, history should not repeat itself.
Steve Paterno is the author of The Rev. Fr. Saturnino Lohure, A Romain Catholic Priest Turned Rebel. He can be reached at [email protected]