Sudanese rebel group claims involvement in alleged coup plot

KHARTOUM, Nov 29, 2004 (Al-Quds) — The leader of a new rebel group in the east of Sudan has announced that his group was behind an alleged recent coup plot to overthrow the government of President Umar al-Bashir.

In an interview, the leader of the Free Lions, Mabruk Mubarak Salim, said his group had shifted the battle to Khartoum.

The following is a text of the interviewed by Salam Al-Tigani and published by London-based newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi on 29 November; all subheadings inserted editorially

– Who are you?

– Salim: I am Mabruk Mubarak Salim Sa’d. My grandfather is Shaykh Sa’d. He has an anchorage in his name at Suwakin that was established in the year 1800. We are the Al-Rashayidah, the most recent Arab migration to Sudan. It began in 1869 and ended in 1882, when a thousand horsemen arrived south of Suwakin with their weapons. It also produced Na’um Shaqir in the sixth segment of Sudan’s history.

Al-Rashayidah tribe

– Where did you come from?

– Salim: The Al-Rashayidah are a tribe in the Hijaz and they have branches in Egypt, Libya, Eritrea, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.

I studied in primary school at Aroma and passed over to middle school at the Wad Sharif School in 1969. Then I studied at middle school and high school at Kassala. The university was in Damascus. I took sociology at Ayn Shams University and my thesis was about intuitive understanding. I entered the constituent assembly in 1986 from District 191, the wandering Al-Rashayidah. It is one of the Democratic Unionist Party’s districts.

– When did you begin your relationship with the Democratic Unionist Party?

– Salim: Our relationship, in sum, is a strong one that goes back to our early grandfathers. My grandfather is the founder of the Al-Rashayidah order. He studied with Al-Mirghani the elder in Asir. So our relationship is ultimately like a road and our relationship with the Unionist Party as a political party is an eternal one. Most of the Al-Rashayidah are Unionists.

Disagreement with Unionist party

– How and why did you leave the Unionists?

– Salim: The party sanctioned the military action in 1995. I was the third of three to whom the arrangement of this activity was assigned, [the other two being] Dr Ja’far Abdallah and Professor Al-Tum Haju. A difference of opinions occurred and we differed in our views of the military action and I resigned from the party in 1996.

– What are the reasons for the disagreement?

– Salim: I was accused of helping Al-Sadiq al-Mahdi get out of Sudan without the party’s knowledge and of being tribalistic. I was accused of having carried out a dialogue with the regime and of having incited some not to mobilize on behalf of the Unionist Party. Because of these accusations, a committee was formed that was under the chairmanship of Mawlana Manufli and with the membership of Fathi Shila and others. The committee was convinced that all of these accusations were but a way to settle the score with me by persons in the party. At the time, I told Mr Muhammad Uthman al-Mirghani: “I will swallow the knife with its blood. I will keep silent, but another option will remain for me.” My option was to leave the party. I left the party and submitted my resignation to the party’s chairman accompanied by my respect and my esteem for him and I opened a commercial office in Saudi Arabia.

Ties with Eritrea

– How did you get to Eritrea?

– Salim: I have had strong ties with the Eritrean Popular Front since the days of the struggle. Contacts were made between us and our people were there with the alliance and the Ummah Party. The birth of the Free Lions was announced on 1 January 1999.

– What is your cause?

– Salim: Ever since the [National] Salvation [Revolution, current government in Khartoum] came along, it began to settle scores with the Al-Rashayidah tribe. During the Gulf War of 1991, we (the Al-Rashayidah) were classified as the obedient servants of Saudi Arabia and 600 Land Cruisers were confiscated from us. At that time, I confronted Muhammad al-Hasan seeking compensation. He was the governor of Kassala at that time. I informed him that this decision was unfair and not consistent with the law and he tried to arrest me. So I told him that prison was better to me than feeling like I am being imprisoned inside my own country.

Then I confronted Salah-al-Din Karrar, the chairman of the economic committee at that time. He informed me that there was no revocation of the decision. That is also what Muhammad al-Amin Khalifah told me, who was the political supervisor of the eastern state at that time. They turned me over to the martyr, Ibrahim Shams-al-Din. So I went to him at his home and he promised me he would review the matter and he talked to me about financial compensation for the confiscated vehicles. I told him that we did not want money for compensation, but they placed funds with the Al-Mazari Bank for use in carrying out a development programme in the region. I actually contacted the specialists and they drew up studies of development projects for me, but I was surprised that the compensation did not equal the value of the vehicles. More than that, the owners of the vehicles were even forced to transfer their vehicles in writing.

Free Lions

In fact, after the Gulf War, there was a dismissal of 6,000 workers from the Al-Rashayidah tribe. They had been working in the United Arab Emirates and they came and brought the 600 vehicles with them that were confiscated. Beyond that, 50 persons were liquidated and I know them by name. After that, the issue changed from a political issue of ours to a demand. There was no education and no health care. We felt like we were being marginalized and swindled. It transformed us from a jihad in word to carrying weapons, especially since the government at that time, according to its prime minister, did not recognize anyone except those who carried weapons. So we carried them and we created the Free Lions.

– Is your new relationship with Asmara the reason why you are being accused of being a creature of the Eritrean intelligence?

– Salim: These words go back to whoever spoke them. We are not an Eritrean creature. Our relationship with Asmara is an old one. I consider [Eritrean president Isayas] Afewerki to be a hero and a commander who liberated his nation.

– Another accusation is that you are doing intelligence work inside Sudan on behalf of Eritrea.

– Salim: Asmara does not need to spy on Sudan.

– You are defending Asmara while it is well known that it sells its allies out. Are you not afraid of being sold out?

– Salim: Afewerki does not sell free men.

– He did it with Abd-al-Aziz Khalid.

– Salim: Abd-al-Aziz had his problem with his organization. I was a member of the reform committee between them and Afewerki was not a party in the matter. Perhaps he had something against Abd-al-Aziz, the source of which are rumours that could be wrong or right.

Relations with SPLM

– Your relationship with the people’s movement (SPLM) began in Asmara?

– Salim: Yes, at the first meeting with Garang, he thought it was strange that we were 100 per cent Arabs, Muslims, and “pink”. How could we be oppressed? Our choice was military action with the people’s movement. It recognized us after it saw us in the field and we participated in military action with 10,000 fighters. We found sincerity in the military attitude in the people’s movement. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) gave command of military operations to the people’s movement under the command of Abd-al-Aziz al-Hilw, who was commanding the Sudan Brigade. Garang considered us to be a qualitative addition to the military action until we became members in the alliance in 2000.

– Has the relationship developed between you and the people’s movement?

– Salim: Some members of the movement considered the Arabs to be the oppressors in Sudan, so they were surprised about the existence of marginalized Arabs. The military action is the limit of the relationship between us.

Cairo talks

– Prof Mabruk, are there Eritrean pressures behind your withdrawal from the government and alliance negotiations in Cairo?

– Salim: Abdallah Jabir, the organization’s secretary in the Eritrean Popular Front, exerted pressure on us to go to the negotiations – we and the Beja organization. So how could Eritrea be exerting pressure on us to withdraw?

– Why did Eritrea put pressure on you to take part in the negotiations?

– Salim: Abdallah Jabir informed us that they had agreed with the Egyptians to resolve the alliance issue. But we, before taking action, informed the Egyptian embassy in Eritrea in writing that if our five members did not take part in the negotiations, we would withdraw. Therefore, now our problem is not with the regime, it is with the alliance itself. Invitations were not sent to Kamil Qaddurah in Khartoum and another person in the UAE, and some members of the Beja Congress did not attend. Now things are on their way to being remedied.

Beja Congress

– Has the remedy begun after your meeting with Mr Muhammad Uthman al-Mirghani?

– Salim: Yes, after we met Mr Muhammad Uthman al-Mirghani, we demanded a meeting of the alliance command staff, but Al-Mirghani was of the opinion that a committee to discuss the matter needed to be formed.

– Have you started the work of the committee that was formed by Al-Mirghani?

– Salim: It has not begun, but it will begin in Asmara. The committee will include the Al-Beja Conference, the Free Lions, and the neutral parties from the Alliance.

– When you withdrew from the negotiations, what was your plan?

– Salim: We have decisions by our organizations and these are that if the number of our members participating in the negotiations is not complete, then we would withdraw. We have already prepared a paper about the east with the vision of the Free Lions and the Beja Congress. We put together a unified delegation to the negotiations under the leadership of Abdallah Kunnah. A single point of view between the two organizations began to take shape as a result of long military action in the field.

Libyan mediation

– There is information confirming the start of a dialogue between you and the government, separate from the alliance.

– Salim: Who knows? We had a dialogue through Libya in 2000 and the government was not serious. Last year, there was the Jeddah meeting and the government also did not appear to be serious. Perhaps it was an incidental meeting that was imposed by the circumstances negotiated to others in order to gain time and confirm its seriousness in reaching a solution with all the parties in the conflict. Now there is Libyan mediation and perhaps a congress will be held there that will include the Free Lions, the Beja Congress, the Justice and Equality Movement, and the Sudan Liberation Movement.

– When did this mediation begin?

– Salim: It has not yet begun in an official form.

“Invitation” from Libya

– Have you received an official invitation from Libya?

– Salim: Yes, we were informed of that officially. The conference will be held at the beginning of this coming December.

– So you are banking on the Libyan role to resolve your problem, like the rebels in Darfur?

– Salim: Libya is more understanding of the Sudanese issue and more receptive to us.

– This is what the rebels in Darfur are saying. It is as if you are tying your fate to the fate of the rebels in Darfur.

– Salim: We are not tying it to the Darfur movements. If there were a common idea between us, that does not mean that we are tying our fate to them. The Libyan role is up front and they contacted us and we trust them. Libya set the precedent of contacting us even before the Darfur movements were formed.

“Sabotage”

– Some of the suspects in the latest sabotage attempt talked about coordination between the Popular Congress Party and the Free Lions.

– Salim: Yes, this is true. There was coordination between us and Justice and Equality Movement in our negotiations with the government in Jeddah. They promised us that everything would be completed in three months. After that, the provocation by some of the members of the government occurred. They said: “What are they going to d?” The government was not interested in sitting down with us after that and did not give us any consideration. I tell you, what happened was not an attempt at sabotage, it was an attempt to overthrow a regime that came about itself by overthrowing a legitimate government.

Darfur rebel group

– How was the shape of the coordination between you and Justice and Equality?

– Salim: The coordination was clear and well thought out and we agreed on the core of the system and the sharing of power.

– Was it up to them to implement it?

– Salim: The implementation was joint between us, Justice and Equality, the Beja Conference, and some organizations on the inside whose names do not need to be mentioned.

– What happened?

– Salim: Mistakes in the implementation occurred.

– How?

– Salim: The person that was arrested in Omdurman thwarted the plan.

– What about the relationship between the ship of weapons that belonged to you that Saudi Arabia objected to recently and this operation?

– Salim: The ship arrived after the failure of the coup and we did not need it. We had sufficient weapons.

“Coup attempt”

– Does that not mean that there was a delayed coup attempt?

– Salim: This is happening. We have shifted the battle to one that is inside Khartoum.

– Your relationship with Justice and Equality, when and how did it begin?

– Salim: Our relationship with them is strong. At first, we considered them to be a part of the Popular Congress. Then finally we learned that they were an organization by itself.

We tried to reach an understanding with them. We got into a long argument over “Are they against the Arabs or not?” We reached the understanding that they are a national movement and one that represents all the parties of Sudan. We agreed that in Sudan there is a problem that the regime feels it is above solving. Therefore, every time we have to look for new allies. That is confirmed by the fact that when we met with the government the first time, we had not met with Justice and Equality. After that, we did meet with them.

– What is the shape of the understanding that exists between you?

– Salim: The enemy of your enemy is your friend. With Justice and Equality, most people are familiar with the government because they were part of it. Dr Khalil Ibrahim was a minister in Darfur. Now our relationship with them is under development.

– In the field, is there a partnership in the fighting?

– Salim: The field relationship is there and, until now, they have been in Darfur. As for the east, we are the guardians of it.

– Some are talking about soldiers from Justice and Equality [Movement] in the east.

– Salim: No soldier from them has come to the east.

– The fingers of accusation are pointing at you in the recent bombings in Shandi.

– Salim: (Agitated) We are not a party in them. We have not coordinated with anyone and we have no knowledge about them except for what is in the media.

Nairobi talks

– How do you view the decisions of the meeting in Nairobi?

– Salim: There is enticement and intimidation in them. What happened in Nairobi pertained just to the south and it expresses a mistaken understanding of the issue of Sudan. The problem is not between the north and the south. If the problem is not solved with a comprehensive solution, then there will not be any good fortune from the solution.

Eastern front

– Do you not think that opening a front in the east has become more difficult now since the people’s movement has allied itself with the government and the alliance is on the way to doing so?

– Salim: That is not true. We ask God that the eastern front not be opened. But if it is opened, then it will be horrible and very effective. No bargaining will get us to a result.

Material from the BBC Monitoring Service