S. Sudan’s secession: Lavrov has unfolded only a part of the story, then what next?

By Hussien Arko Menawi

When Mr Sergey Lavrov the Foreign Minister of Russia has uttered the unsaid about the conspiracy against the unity of Sudan, many were taken by surprise, not because of the extent the superpower states interfered in our policy and damaged the interests of the people of Sudan but because how Omer al-Bashir the head of the state dares to sell his own country and people on the international political market.

All Sudanese undoubtedly Aware that the issue of ICC has become a tremendous pressure on Omer al-Bashir and his NCP party and at the same time it is a lucrative business for many players on the market of International politics.

However this shocking statement by the first man of diplomacy in Russia has raised so many concerns about the future of the remained Sudan, as long as there are still many areas similar to South Sudan, their prolonged conflict not addressed, the stick of ICC is still standing as a threat against the same dictator and the business of international politics on Sudan not yet closed.

What was heard from the statement of Mr Lavrov can be easily interpreted in a context of further disintegration of the Sudan which means that the survival of Omer al-Bashir and his NCP party once again stands as a vital issue against the unity of Sudan and the scenario of the South is overshadowing the political arena in the existing Sudan. The closest interpretation is the separation of Darfur and the two Areas in a deal similar to what happened in the South, let us speculate this scenario for the time being as it is the possible one.

From this perspective it also seems there is a ceremony underway for three other or more newly born states that probably soon emerge from the womb of crises of the existing Sudan to form a new map within which visible political entities are Darfur, the two Areas and the Central and Northern Riverian of Sudan which has been named by Dr Hamdi as Dongola Kosti Sinnar Triangle. For the Eastern Sudan, the situation is less predictable but a conflict is likely to break out over Eastern Sudan and the two powers possibly to interfere are Eritrea and Ethiopia while the Central Sudan that aspires to be a part of Pan- Arab will definitely fall under the intimidation of its strong neighbour in the north if not an easy prey for Egypt.

This scenario is not a coincidence but it is an outcome of accumulated political, diplomatic and military setbacks. The so-called Islamic Movement of Sudan, since its coup d’etat has led the country into successive crises and misfortune political risks at the expense of the country’s sovereignty and the interest of its people. The experience of the Gulf war was the beginning of risky political adventures geared by the Islamic Movement in Sudan. In this war the ,Sudan had paid deep political and diplomatic price because of political immaturity and reckless leadership led by Dr Hassan al-Turabi and his disciples such Ali Osman Taha and his contemporaries in politics who never have had experiences of running a state apparatus, in particular what has to do with the intricate art of international relations.

Because of lack of a rational political vision the National Congress Party has incited the world against the Sudan in a very short time through its stupid practices and aggressive media. While the full-scale Jihadist war was going on in the South, not only the people of Sudan but also the whole world watched how the media was aggressive at that time. Most of the media discourse seemed as if there was a declared war against so many countries. Neither US nor the Gulf and Egypt nor even the neighbouring African countries have been spared by the tonne of Jihadist threats sent through early morning messages recited by a zealot military officer called Younis Mahmood.

The events of the Gulf led to the division of the world into alliances similar to the situation in the Second World War and the natural consequences were that the loser had to listen to the winner and pay the costs of its position. Thus Sudan has paid the price of its supporting the aggression of Saddam against Kuwait in 1990.

Unfortunately the Islamic Movement in Sudan did not benefit from its mistake of supporting the invasion of Kuwait, instead, it continued with further adventures that have direct involvement of the NCP influential figures against International and Regional bodies and characters. The attempt to assassinate the former president of Egypt Mr Hosni Mubark resulted in a deeply political, diplomatic and military conflict between Sudan and Egypt and since then Sudan has been under the squeeze of almost daily blackmail.

Political fluctuation is the constant quality of the National Congress Party and following such instability in domestic and international politics made Sudan pay a heavy price for the survival of the NCP Regime and its kleptocratic elements. The latest shift of the NCP Regime from the Iranian pole to the Gulf pole will not be less damaging than the previous ones as long as all these shifts are not on basis of equitable relations. The Regime turned to the Gulf pole because of immense domestic and international pressures and that is why the Gulf States found this opportunity to use the regime for dirty roles such as the war in Yemen and Ethio-Egyptian tension.
If we ignore the damage brought by the NCP on Sudan due to its toxic policy whether the division of Sudan or loss of its territories aside, the next most awful question is that how much damage Sudan is waiting for, in the coming period if the NCP Regime continues in the policy of selling the sovereignty of the Sudan ? The answer to this question may not require much effort particularly from anyone has the ability to predict in Sudanese politics and it is not even much difficult to the ordinary Sudanese but the answers of HOW and WHEN will remain the core challenge for many of us including the NCP Regime. This is true because much of the issue or policy in Sudan during the NCP Regime is purely cultivated from its mistakes by others and unfortunately many decisions are taken against the interest of the people in Sudan while decision makers in Khartoum have no any role, this happens because almost the players know the golden rule of the game which simply taken on basis of let the Regime in Sudan commits a capital crime and then to be trapped upon its mistakes.

In fact, the Regime has been dragged like a laboratory rat into a very risky and lengthy maze route for many times before it has made any calculation for consequences might result from its policies. It has been forcefully driven through Naivasha, Cairo, Abuja and Doha and at each juncture, it was goaded by the policy of stick and carrot. In a time span of almost three decades, the NCP Regime stepped on many complications with no necessity. It sponsored international terrorism and Khartoum has become a shelter of an Islamic terrorism, it committed genocide in Darfur and the south Sudan. Some of its influential elements involved in an assassination attempt in Addis Ababa and overtly sided Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Kuwait? and in the end each crime ended with shaken consequences of which, the disintegration of the country, the indictment of the head of the state and a concession of a piece of land.

Now what is unseen about the future of Sudan not hidden behind the Regime’s Intelligence services in Khartoum but as Lavrov disclosed in his press conference, a lot of unsaid about the future of Sudan is hidden in the White House, the Kremlin, the Elysée, 10 Down Street. Brussels and maybe in Beijing and what we Sudanese eager to say is that our ship is navigating hazardous waters with reckless crew and we thank Mr Lavrov for disclosing this tiny part of the iceberg on the route but we need to hear more from the White House, 10 Down Street, the Elysee, Brussels and Beijing.