Opposition alignment in ‘Sudan call’ accord
By: Mohamed Elshabik*
Sudanese politicians, civil society and armed oppositions forces signed on Wednesday 4 December in Addis Ababa the ‘Sudan call’ to dismantle what they refer to as the one-party state. The rationale for the agreement is to promote equal citizenship, and pave the way for a popular change to be enacted through a people’s struggle. The ultimate objective of the agreement was summarized as follows: the establishing of a robust foundation to protect the rights of the people of Sudan, to liberate them from totalitarianism, violence and impoverishment and move towards a lasting democracy, comprehensive peace, and equal development.
The ‘Sudan call’ agreement also demanded to seize war and allow immediate humanitarian access to the affected areas, and stressed specifically on the affected war zone areas (the two areas and Darfur).
What’s new in this deal is that it is the first agreement between the political forces in opposition that brings together the strengths of the political parties, rebel movements and civil society in Sudan against the government of the National Congress Party (NCP) instituted when Bashir came to power in June 1989.
The deal also represents a breakthrough and signals steady progress in the direction of unifying the opposition parties against the NCP. The process toward unifying opposition groups was stipulated in the Paris Declaration and represents an objective that has long been advocated for by different opposition groups. In addition to Paris declaration the ‘Sudan call’ accord brings together the civil society and the armed groups. Unification of opposition forces was thought of as a method of threatening the hold of the NCP and unsettling the current balance of power, which at presently is controlled by the NCP.
The ‘Sudan call’ document however, avoids making any reference to the armed struggle and rather suggests using political means to attend Sudan’s complex issues. This peaceful approach signals two factors; firstly, the influence and input of Al-Sadig Al-Mahdi in forming the new alliance. Al-Mahdi is a staunch advocate of change by peaceful means. Secondly, a somewhat lamentable consensus between the different opposition groups particularly the armed factions, regarding the challenges of the armed resistance, as well as their readiness to shift direction and place more emphasis on the political aspects in going forward.
Focusing on public resistance and political means, the agreement was strengthened by the official inclusion of civil society as one of the signatories of the agreement. This recognition of the civil society, represented by head of the alliance of the Sudanese Civil Society organizations, Amin Makki Madani, may change the elements on the ground. Namely as civil society can mobilize constituencies more effectively, even if this may provoke brutal and aggressive reactions from the NCP, as seen during last year September’s uprisings and recent student protests.
Another factor to be added to the significance of the ‘Sudan call’ agreement is that as a result of its diplomatic language, peaceful approach, and legitimate demands, the international community may have no choice but to support this new initiative in the quest for a lasting peace and sustainable solution that will end Sudan’s ever intensifying crisis/conflicts.
The recent speech made by the president of Sudan Omer al-Bashir, which was seen as being aggressive by many, warned the opposition and vowed to prosecute Mr Al-Mahdi based on the Paris agreement. This in combination with the fact that the faltering peace talks in Addis Ababa concerning the two areas and Darfur appears to have reached a deadlock. The current on-going peace talks seems to provide little hope that the Sudanese government is genuinely willing to engage itself in serious peace talks that would be conducive to a peaceful transition and democratic dispensation. In reality, the international community may be left with no choice but to support the important initiative that has brought together these vital elements of Sudan’s political landscape.
Internationally, the ‘Sudan call’ presents little hope for a stable Sudan in the form of a unified opposition front that has one voice and is keen to discuss and debate governance reforms matters in this unruly country.
Naturally, the ‘Sudan call’ is not without problems, this refers specifically to its generality. The wide-ranging agreement’s terms/terminology does not necessarily provide specific means, or deliverables. The agreement uses governance and reform buzzwords (democracy, sustainable peace, citizenship, just and equal development, etc) but does not answer all questions, for instance how to enforce the popular uprising and public mobilization on the ground. The phrase ‘… through the daily mass struggle to achieve popular uprising’ is vague and does not present a clear and specific plan, which raise scepticism that the accord is yet another public relation and advocacy work. Thus, the real unification of these new opposition alliances remains to be seen.
Nonetheless, despite its shortfalls and generality the ‘Sudan call’ seems a work-in-progress that have certainly rallied the NCP and released its resentment and paranoia. Realizing its significance the NCP has summoned its leadership for a meeting under the command of president, al-Bashir. After the meeting, Presidential aide Dr Ghandour informed the journalists that the ‘Sudan call’ is yet another agreement like others that have preceded it and he further described it as an ‘unholy alliance’. Fearing it might also attract further disparate elements, Ghandour continued, ‘We trust that Sudanese people are conscious and mindful of the plans that are set up by the international enemies against Sudanese people and the Sudan Armed Forces’, in an attempt to trigger some national emotions.
The NCP leadership office’s rather urgent meeting and the fact that the NCP has tried to associate its response and reaction with the one of the Sudanese people to reject what they described as an ‘unholy alliance’ reveals the extent of the NCP’s concern; furthermore that the ‘Sudan call’ is a threat to their leadership.
There is no doubt that the opposition forces, despite their differences, have this time finally managed to breakthrough, pose a threat to NCP and gain some momentum that they may need to maintain and develop, if the Sudan is to ever to witness a real and people driven shift in power and change.
*Mohamed Elshabik is a Sudanese blogger, analyst, and Aid worker. Follow @ELSHABIKM