To Tom Perriello, the United States must be a partner
By: Munzer Mustafa*
When the people moved to end the June 30, 1989 regime, hopes were high to build a Sudan of freedom, peace, and justice. This dream has long captivated the Sudanese, culminating in the formation of a democratic civil movement that led the 1924 uprising. You know what happened subsequently in 1968, 1985, 2011, and 2019. Throughout this period, international and regional parties have supported separatist movements, sometimes fascist and other times theocratic, to prevent the maturation of the democratic model.
I don’t believe that the goal of the December 2018 revolution was merely to topple the regime. I’ve repeatedly discussed this assumption with Mr. Volker Perthes. What concerns me is that many who we thought had reached a mature understanding of the Sudanese situation also hold this belief, This made their efforts go in the wrong direction. It’s disheartening that they are outspoken about this. This brings up a critical question regarding the assumption: does legitimizing separatist groups in Sudan support stability in the medium and long term?.
Words that accommodate the current dynamic context may fail to describe the stance of those we consider friends of a free, peaceful, and just Sudan. However, anyone unable to clearly define their position does not deserve friendship. Many share my viewpoint, and we have numerous options for alignment. We just need to reframe our media messages without compromising our legitimate goals. Those relying on traditional tools to understand political interactions and processes may fall into the trap.
As you know, the socio-economic trends in Sudan can be easily inferred, but understanding the social motivations for change is crucial. Regional crime lords are trying to suppress these voices and seem to be succeeding. Let me pause here to discuss the statements of their local agents’ leaders, like Amin Hassan Omar, who said, “We lost power and public opinion,We will regain the ability to influence through war.” Isn’t this what you’ve heard from regional corruption networks aiming to recycle separatist movement leaders, particularly the so-called moderate Islamists, into the new political process? I agree with you that they are not influential and lack popular support. Yes, they are like that, but they do not operate according to a popular agenda, so this issue does not affect their destructive performance.
Let me clarify the situation: when this gang emerged, it had no social base at all. Instead, it infiltrated government institutions and repurposed them to empower its deviant members. They orchestrated a coup, failing initially but eventually succeeding and controlling institutions and media platforms. This inflicted significant suffering on the Sudanese people through a regime that lasted 30 years. What are they doing now? They are merely seeking a legitimate foothold in power, even if symbolic, to spread like cancer once more and attempt another coup.
Years of manipulation of government institutions have led most Sudanese to distrust the ruling class, even if it includes some of their own (as seen in the recent transitional experience). This distrust was fueled by the separatist movements that have successively governed Sudan. Currently, these movements are effectively appeasing both sides of the conflict to perpetuate the war and undermine any efforts to stop it. This context explains the unspoken alliance between the far-right and far-left in this tragedy; both are adversely affected by being equated with others.
It is unfair for democrats to judge others solely by their own moral standards. Assuming that partially integrating a theocratic fascist gang into the transitional process would be a manageable component overlooks the significant obstacles they pose to dismantling their system. Therefore, if Washington desires a partnership with a Sudan that values freedom, peace, and justice, it should not merely echo its own voices within Sudan. Instead, it must work earnestly to learn lessons and engage seriously with the genuine voices capable of making an impact. Tom, I remind you of your belief: we seek a partnership, not lessons.
I repeat, if Washington wants a partnership, it must announce its agenda and stop the procrastination that serves regional axes with no interest in a stable and prosperous Khartoum. Misreading the situation can lead to clashes with new variables that are hard to predict. Washington must understand why Sudanese people want this friendship to flourish. When it does, the vision will align with the aspirations of both parties.
Note: This article is translated from Arabic.
* Researcher at the Public Policies Institute – Sudan; May 16, 2024
