What are the options for post-CPA Sudan?

By El-tahir Adam El-faki

October 4, 2010 — Sudan’s unity and perhaps its sole existence are at stake. The south is certainly to opt for secession as all indicators demonstrate. The north is unstable and will be left with a vacuum as the interim constitution expires sooner the south goes. Let us discuss how Sudan went into this dark labyrinthine pathway and check on the options available for the remainder of the county!

Sudan is British colonial creation based on geography that lacks national identity and unity. Elites from certain ethnic minorities of northern Sudan inherited political and state power from the British colonials and ever since entrenched themselves as neo-colonial masters with distinct socioeconomic setting. Some of the ruling elites are descendents of interactions and intermarriages between Sudanese and foreign immigrants from the Middle East, North Africa and else who dealt in commercial and trading in slavery and identify themselves as Arabs. Over time they have collectively became an established socio-political institution and a privileged ruling minority. To preserve those privileges they continued to adopt different opportunistic ethnic or religious ideologies to stay in power and protect their economic and social interests. They failed to secure a fair, just and equitable system to unify Sudan and create national Sudanese identity. Power and economic resources of the country have been directed to benefit their ethnic groups and the northern region resulting in the development of marginalised Sudanese societies in the other regions of Sudan. Southern Sudan, Darfur, Kordofan, Blue Nile and the Eastern regions were mostly affected by such policies.

The South went into a long protracted war to secure its rights but was summarily met in bitter wars by different successive governments until a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was finally signed in 2005 between the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and the SPLA/M. The NCP exploited Islamic/religious sentiments with grave consequences. It took some time for the Darfurians to realise that unequal distribution of power and wealth are the main causes of marginalisation and backwardness of the South and the other regions, Darfur included. Seeing the extensive scale of hegemony and nepotism of the regime of National Islamic Front the Justice & Equality movement published ‘The Black Book’ in 2000 with impeccable statistical proves of the imbalance of power and wealth sharing in favour of specific three tribes in the north. Seeds of rebellion grew in Darfur that turned into a bloody armed conflict in 2003. Unable to play the religious card the government reverted to Arab/ethnicity sentiments against the rising Darfurian rebellion with devastating and catastrophic results. Over 300000 people were killed and further three millions were either internally displaced or made refugees in Chad and other countries.

The post-colonial period in Sudan has been incessantly marred by marginalisation of the indigenous African people of non-Arab descent, instability and wars mainly in the Southern region, the Nuba Mountains of Kordofan , the Blue Nile and finally in Darfur. The cycle is plagued by instability and wars that have been partially interrupted by the CPA in the South. The CPA arbitrarily divided Sudan into South and North. The NCP chose the Sharia laws for the north while the south preferred the secular system. This arrangement has so far brought relative peace to the South but failed to secure it for the rest of the country. Racism, political sectarianism and tribal nepotism continued unabated by the ruling elites from the northern region against the marginalised peoples of Sudan creating huge gaps in power and wealth sharing.

The NCP signed the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) with the Sudan Liberation Army SLA/Minni Minawi faction in 2006. The agreement brought more miseries and failed to secure peace in Darfur. Fighting escalated and the problem worsened sending Sudan into more instability and war in the North itself.

The Darfur problem started to show signs of chronicity. Kordofan has been gradually dragged into the conflict fighting in support of JEM’s nationalist causes. In its quest for power the NCP will resort to use its policy of stirring Arab tribal sentiments and instigate wars and civil strife against the indigenous populations in Kordofan. The extension of the war into the region will certainly expand to involve other regions of the country which will threaten the country’s existence. If the cycle is left to continue more regions will follow until Sudan fragments and exists no more.

How to stop the process and solve the Sudan problems?

JEM has been objectively advancing the concept of a United Sudan on new qualifications as the most appropriate model to end marginalisation and stop fragmentation of the country. There are four possible scenarios and outcomes for the future of the country. Lets us take these scenarios in turn:

Firstly: United Sudan while the South is still part of the country

A short period of less than four months remains for the CPA to conclude referendum for unity or separation of Southern Sudan in January 2011. During this remaining period and while the South is still a part of Sudan efforts to make unity attractive are vigorously sought and implemented. The presence of the National Congress Party (NCP) in power is impediment to a united Sudan. Insisting on its divisive Sharia laws the NCP will neither accept a southerner nor a Christian to rule the country. Removal of the regime from power is therefore essential. A truly secular democratic federal system which unites Sudan by common causes, objectives and interests is then applied in the ruins of the NCP. Qualifications for unity of Sudan include: a secular democratic system based on ideals of fundamental changes is built on the ruins of the NCP, freewill and voluntary process for unity, citizenship as the sole base for rights irrespective of race, religion or sex, free choice for any region to leave if it saw unsuitable, respect of rule of law and human rights and peaceful neighbourly co-existence.

The Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) has been publicly calling for a United Sudan in which the first round of presidency goes to the South irrespective of his/her religion. This model is ideal to eradicate marginalisation and solve the problems of future civil wars in Sudan. The unity of the country will be preserved; the South will be able to rule the whole country by example instead of the region and the ill-feelings of marginalisation will be gradually eroded. A strategic relationship between the SPLA and JEM together with the other political parties is necessary for the success of the model. The model is a transitional arrangement in an interim period where the South will also enjoy the retention of the CPA provisions for the referendum for an agreed period during which implementation of true democracy and citizenships are tested.

Secondly: United Sudan without the South- United Regions of Sudan (URS)

While we are totally committed to the ideals of unity, better life for all Sudanese, freedom, justice, human dignity and equality we support the south for self-determination. Where the South decides to secede the remaining regions in the north are divided into six regions; Darfur, Kordofan, the East, North, Khartoum and the Central region. Each region retains the right for self-determination and semi- sovereignty in its laws and security arrangements. The regions attend a General Regional Conference (GRC) where all political issues including identity and religion are discussed and the bases for voluntary unity of the regions are laid out followed by a Constitutional Conference to draft a new constitution. The constitution will be subject to national referendum by all peoples of the regions for ratification. Only then they unite as United Regions of Sudan (URS). The new form of Sudan will be called the United States of Sudan (USS).

This scenario or model is ideal for the post-CPA era where the South becomes an independent state and paves the way for both URS and the South to reunite once again in a new form of Sudan voluntarily if they wish to do so. Again, the presence of the NCP in power is an obstacle to achieve such a goal. The political parties must prove responsible to arrange and execute regime change in the north. It is not difficult to attain.

Thirdly: Darfur/Kordofan Confederate States

Where the war in Darfur shows signs of protraction with no outright win by the warring sides and a regional conference is impossible to convene Darfurians and Kordofanese may be forced to opt for self-determination and form a Confederate State. This model remains theoretical for the time being but not farfetched. The scenario is against the objectives and principles of united Sudan. It might however become part of a transitional security arrangement in a peace deal until such a time in which total liberation of the other regions of Sudan take place and all the regions reunite and form the URS. The South may find the model attractive and invite the new states to unite with it. Once again the NCP in power is a direct threat but not as much as it is in the second scenario but the armed movements in Darfur and Kordofan are the guarantors of its success.

Fourthly: Independent Sudanese States

We remain nationalist in our quest for a united Sudan. In this model the regions fail to unite, wars erupt and engulf other regions and each of which may decide to go its own way as separate new states. This is a perilous model but not implausible. The signs of fragmentation of the country are eminent. The fragmented regions will certainly lead to further civil wars and social unrests. Minorities within the separating regions will be encouraged to rebel and seek self-determination sending Sudan into Somalification and regional instabilities. The ingredients for separate States are already in place in Darfur and Kodofan the former of which was once an independent and recognised State. We have to work hard for Sudan to avoid this option. The rule of NCP and its continuous policies are the main factors for this scenario to unfold. It is therefore paramount to dismantle and remove it from power if we are to avoid such an outcome.

Where the South secede all political forces in the north must seek to promote the second scenario and keep the remaining regions as United Regions of Sudan. By so doing they leave the door open for the South to consider rejoining voluntarily or they may chose to join the newly-formed Southern state in a new formula accepted by it.

We commend the first scenario to preserve the integrity of Sudan while the South is still part of the country without prejudice to its right for self determination as stipulated in the CPA. We will continue to strongly support calls for unity of Sudan subject to the qualifications discussed above. Our support for self determination of all the regions in Sudan is unequivocal and in line with international conventions as a fundamental right for all minorities. As such it must be taken as given that all regions or remaining regions of Sudan shall have the right of self determination if they so wish.

It is vital for all Sudanese opposition political forces to join hands and actively engage in adopting mechanisms for regime change to ditch the NCP. Only then the country may see a window of opportunity for preserving its integrity and save it from descending into total disarray and chaos.

The author is Dr. El-tahir El-faki. He is JEM/Legislative Speaker. He can be reached at [email protected]