Sudan: The North-South Elections Dichotomy
There are just four weeks to go before polling stations are set to open across Sudan, giving voters a choice of political parties for the first time in 24 years. For many people in the country this will be the first time they will ever vote. The coming moment is historic.
The incumbent regime in Khartoum has had a stranglehold over power for more than two decades. Over this time it has been involved in two internal wars and numerous additional internal conflicts. It has used suppressive security measures on its citizens, limited the freedoms of its peoples and actively and sometimes brutally countered all forms of opposition.
Since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, oil revenues have turned Khartoum into a boomtown, where construction abounds and the city’s traffic has swelled to problematic levels. In upmarket restaurants young girls are in touch with the most up-to-date trends; hip hugging jeans and funky tops, accessorised with matching head scarves. These are the unconscious implications of the peace agreement –- money is generally accompanied by modernity.
Similarly over the last six years the ruling NCP has slowly and hesitantly opened up to the idea of democratisation, forced perhaps by a similar set of unconscious and uncontrollable reverberations. It has been compelled to take steps to include a wider set of stakeholders in governance, to negotiate with a Southern counterpart party, navigate international engagement and share power with an autonomous regional government in Juba.
Elections are a further step in this process of unfurling Sudan’s governance system. Some six months ago, whilst the South remained relatively asleep and unconcerned by elections, Northerners were preparing for their own “˜referendum’; for the opposition’s chance to dislodge the NCP from power. Elections were vitally important to the political parties and civil society of the North who mobilised heavily for the All Parties Political Conference in Juba in October last year. The consequent formation of the Juba Alliance was a good achievement, bringing together the opposition to begin the game-play of beating the NCP.
Yet as polling day draws closer, members of the Alliance seem to have forgotten their determination of earlier months. Threats to boycott the elections are the most common message coming from the Northern opposition, who seem to spend a large amount of energy decrying the unfair dynamics within which they must function and proposing dramatic solutions solutions. Security laws and apparatus, media ownership and airtime, the ineffectiveness and bias of the National Elections Commission and the use of state resources are the most common issues raised.
The expectations of the Juba Alliance are high, perhaps a little too high; they are so focussed on trying to level the playing field that they blind themselves to the fact that the game has already started and they are unprepared to play.
It is interesting to see that these leaders remain largely active in Khartoum. Rather than going out of the capital to speak to citizens, to impress upon them the importance of the elections (and thereby assist in the enormous task of voter education) discuss with them the challenges facing the country and how they as political leaders propose to overcome these challenges, they stay enmeshed in the politics of the capital. The centre-peripheries dynamics of Sudanese governance extends also to opposition politics, and we already know that this is no winning formula. The opposition parties of the North have miscalculated, for it seems that not only do they underrate the importance of the Sudanese voters in these elections, but they undermine their own power. As Alice Walker said, “The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any”.
In the South on the other hand, while elections have been slow to take centre stage in the region, they now consume a massive amount of attention and discussion. The majority of news coverage is on elections related issues. In the regional capital Juba, this has generated a tangible boost in political engagement. Whatever disillusionment people may harbour is accompanied by the difficult-to-resist discussions abounding. The recent emergence of independent candidates from within the SPLM further increased the “˜interest’ factor of these elections and there has been weeks where a frenzy of candidates seeking support from influential Sudanese who could sway communities.
Candidates are now out campaigning, with little time for anything else and rallies and processions are an everyday occurrence. Posters plaster over signboards and massive billboards with advertisements for the Presidency have been erected across the town. It is wonderful to watch public mini-buses drive by with their respective candidates looking out from the rear window. Political deals and negotiations, unruly soldiers and a bumpy playing field included, all in all, elections are happening in earnest in the South, because players are willing to play.
This is not to say that the notion of free and fair elections is not contested in the South. There have been numerous reports of harassment and arrests of candidates, of soldiers confiscating and pulling down posters of opposition parties and two radio stations were recently closed down in Juba for covering an interview of an independent candidate for Governorship. In the Political Parties Summit convened by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel in Juba recently, complaints against the SPLM were unleashed relentlessly by participants.
Yet despite the challenges and obstacles, however last minute the preparations and however unevenly the odds are stacked, Southern candidates are going for it. Perhaps it is a legacy of their struggle, this indomitable and determined spirit to at least attempt to rise to a challenge.
The contrast between the Northern and Southern opposition in these elections is clear. Elections, so critical to the Northern region, are losing momentum through the low willingness of candidates to offer their citizens a choice, whilst Southerners are grasping at whatever democratic opportunities they are being given with all their might. Let me suggest that there are two lessons that Northern opposition leadership can learn from their Southern compatriots. First, that self-belief is a prerequisite to winning in any situation; and second, that the story of the underdog has always been the most powerful and inspiring narrative.
If there’s anything that Sudanese people need from their leadership at this moment, it is some self-belief and inspiration.
English
Amharic
Arabic
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
French
German
Hausa
Italian
Portuguese
Sesotho
Shona
Spanish
Swahili
Xhosa
Yoruba
Zulu
Dear Neha,
I strongly agree with your analysis. Back in December, the Juba Alliance parties were enthusiastic about building the scaffolding for freer and fairer elections, such as an Electoral Code of Conduct and a Declaration of Principles, knowing well that the NCP was still ahead of the game and likely to emerge on top. During February, in my role as adviser to the AU Panel, I saw these same parties hesitating and wanting to challenge the very basis of the election itself. They had different reasons for doing so — some want to postpone the referendum because they fear that should the south take the secession option, the opposition will be terminally weakened, others because they fear that their representation in a new national assembly will be less than it is in today’s appointed parliament. Many of their concerns are genuine, but many are behaving less like democrats and more like elites in the marketplace. Meanwhile, as you write, the southerners are becoming more enthused with democratization, overtaking their northern compatriots.
These would be seen as the teething problems of a new democracy, except that most of the leaders of the Juba Alliance parties are veterans of the parliamentary regimes of 1965-1969 and 1986-1989. The record of those regimes is not exactly a paragon of democracy and we should not have high hopes that these old leopards will change their spots.
I find this analysis really interesting as it completely contradicts what we heard last week in Nairobi from John Duku, the outgoing SSudanese envoy to Kenya; in his mind, the elections were of little import to the South and all attention, resources and energy were focused on January 2011. The failure of the census inequalities to be resolved, the widening threat of boycott in the South and the inequitable playing field in terms of access to campaign resources all add up to what are unlikely to be free, fair or transparent elections, he said, and thus everyone in the south was just biding their time until the referendum.
Dear Neha
Khartoum in the 1970s and early 80s was like down town London (West End) in the night, AL Gamhoria Street was like Piccadilly, now it is like the Ghost house in the evening. I don’t think oil add much to the majority , only destroy our main economic activity Agriculture and fuel the wars in every part of the country, 99.9% of Sudanese are worth off now, we have more than 90% of our young Universities graduates unemployed , and no one is hopping for changes, in the current climate.
don’t think the coming election will make big changes in the life of the majority of Sudanese, the main reason is many issues related to the transition to democracy have been deliberately ignored and the NCP does not want real democratic changes , they want to summarise the how process into voting without addressing the main issues of the transition to democracy it is not just about having code of conduct or not, regarding the conduct, we have many laws which spilled that clearly we just want them to be implement n, before and after it we just want the available laws to be put in practice include the Election Act Interim Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights.
Sudanese have experienced many free and fair elections, in 1953, 1955, 1965, 1968 and 1986, I remember 1968 election as I used to distribute leaflet of my cousin when I was in the second year of primary school and in 1986 I was trade union leader played role in April 1985 upraising which overthorugh Nameri, there are huge different between those two elections and the current one I will summarised them on the following:
1- Sudan and Sudanese never been divided like want happening now , in 1968 my cousin won the eastern constituency of Kordofan more Arab from Kenan, Awald Himaid and Hoasma than people from our tribe ( Tagali) they want alliance between most of those tribes started in 1905 , when they used to fights the British together and in consideration for that the Normad have the right to graze their animals , now not they can’t graze their animals but if they pass around they will kill them and their animals . By brother and sister and six cousin are running for elections they will win because they are from the tribes ( our sons and we will vote for them) that wasn’t the case in 1968 and 1986. Division and tribalism is the common factors in Sudan north south , our communities are more divided than ever, the reason is the NCP policies ( divide and rule) for the last 22 years , Darfur is one example.
2- Sudan still facing many major problems the two parties to the CPA trying to resolve their difference in ways which undermined the democratic principle and the constitution , just the last agreement to give SPLM 40 seats unelected in the south and 4 in South Kordofan and 2 in Abyei the question why undermining the democratic principle and the constitution if the senses and the constituencies demarcation are wrong and the parties agreed on that why not do them right first, why do they want have an unelected undemocratic MPs to question the whole process
I think we either have proper democracy like want we have experienced before or not to have for the sake of abasing the NCP and make the difficult problems which Sudan is facing unsolvable.
I don’t the current chronic problem will be solve just by introducing Election Code of conduct; it is more deeper than that.
Look at what happen in the south less than a week after the signing of the Code of Conduct, SPLA stop 2 Radios because they were interviewing, independent candidates and people rang to complain about lake of services.
In Khartoum at the day when the NCP joined south Sudanese political parties, by signing the Code of conduct they refused for, the Umma Party ( Sadig Al Mahdi ) to broadcast his election message in which he criticised the NCP.
Sudan now is more divided than ever tribalism and mistrust, just within the NCP rank , there is civil war based of tribalism not principals or values the Islamists in the last two democratic election used to be the most discipline political parties, that just show you how our politics have descended .
What we want in Sudan is how to honour agreements when we sign them until we do that all our problems will not be resolved.
I just want to say this is an excellent post. Thank you very much for sharing. My wife is currently contesting for one of the parliament seats for Pibor county in Jonglei State and because she is not with SPLM nor NCP, but rather a smaller party, has been finding the task slightly difficult. While I may be biased in saying this, I do believe she has the belief and determination needed to get her where she wants to go. Watching the election process in the south has been very interesting and am looking forward to see how things turn out in the end.
Dear Hafiz,
I am trying to make sense of your comment and it seems to me that you are falling into the same trap as the toothless opposition which had 5 years to prepare for these elections and failed to do their homework, and are now spending its time shouting “it isnt fair!” instead of building their base. How many of them have even been seen outside Khartoum? The elections of the past might have been free and fair but they were hardly inclusive as most of the southerners didnt have the chance to vote, which they do today. Also most of the vote in those elections was organized on sectarian or tribal lines. We have the same leaders today for most of these parties as we did 20 years ago or even 40 years ago and of course they are bemoaning the fact that they are not winning automatically like they did then.
Dear Khalid
First I am not defending the opposition or the NCP, I am addressing the issue of what genuine democracy means, do you want to tell me that we are heading for a free and fair election, according to internationally agreed norms, if that what you believe you must be living in a cloud Coco land , what fair and free election means for you Sudanese people experienced free and fair election five times before why do want them to accept any election just because of the NCP. Just yesterday I had a meeting with 50 independent candidates running in Khartoum state they told me the difficulties they are facing starting with dealing with the National Election Commission (NEC), although , those are not from Juba Alliance which you are talking about. The last five years which supposed to be years for transition to democracy and to ensure all the agreement signed between the NCP and others parties include SPLM (CPA) do you think the NCP honoured its commitment to those agreements which are?
1- The Comprehensive Peace Agreement ( CPA)
2- Cairo Peace agreement
3- The East Peace agreement
4- Darfur Peace Agreement
5- Many others
If you have a clue please let me know and with what percentage those agreement are been honoured until now.
You are talking about the last five year and want supposed to be done by the opposition but according to the CPA , those five years are supposed to be transitional period which prepare the country to smooth transition to democracy, the core democratic principal is rule of law, the supreme law of the country is its constitution , it is not fully implemented more than 12 acts contradict the National Interim Constitution the NCP make the changes which serve their interest like changing the NGos Act to restrict their activities and have more control over their work and resources, refuses to introduce changes the National security & Intelligent Law to comply with the constitution, Sudan Interim Constitution include Bill of Rights they are refusing to include its provisions in all the laws, all those changes do not need, money from donors or need lifting the American Sanctions, just asking the members of the National Assembly to rectify them, but the main issues is lack of Will to do that and it is the NCP same tactics to sign agreement and kill them from inside, with a country heading for supposed to be democratic elections without upholding the constitution and the NCP pick and choose which part to implement and which not.
If you are questioning the point which I have raised regarding tribalism , Sudan is now more divided in ethnic and tribal lines than ever I will give you hundreds of examples north and south. How many failed tribal reconciliation conference which been held by the regime in the last five years I am ready to give the figure.
If you are saying the traditional parties used to rely on tribalism to win in the past that is right but not to the extend which the NCP is doing now it is not only dividing tribes politically, armed them to kill each other, that left wounds which not going to heal for tens of years, I mentioned some examples in my first posting I am ready to give you tens of examples. The NCP try to used the same methods buying in tribal leaders sons but they messed it up just two examples: 1- in north Kordofan the problems with Abu Kalbish ( Hamar Tribe) ,Dr Faisal ( Goama tribe) and others it turned in civil war 2- in the White Nile state with Habani ( Hassania tribe), they bought those sons of tribal leaders and later want to messed around with them and they turn against and them , that will cost them a lot.
Just look at the current dispute between Juba Alliance and the NEC it is not about five or ten years to prepare it is bout genuine concerns regarding applying the Election Act beyond any suspicion and doubts, the issue of registering soldiers in their work place WHY, that is against all the norms and standard in the world and also against the law, why just soldiers in Khartoum East and not everyone, if you have answer for that please let me know.
Five years for the opposition to prepare, against 22 year of absolute rule of the NIF, done everything to kill anything democratic, milking most of the country resources and turning many Sudanese into beggars, if you need figures I am more than happy to provide you with that.
You are talking about the first inclusive election , I do not know what are you talking about if you are really following what going on in Sudan you will know this is the least inclusive democratic election since 1953, election is not going to happen in many parts of Sudan, part of Darfur is out of it now South Kordofan might be all out of it.
It is not only election this is an election and a selection at the same time, 46 MPs supposed to be undemocratically selected, undermining the whole process and the constitution.
The main question is this election going to make Sudan stable and peaceful, or complicate things further that is my worry
Dear Hafiz
everything you say is common knowledge and nobody disputes it. Nobody should be surprised that after 20 years of the Inqaz that the old parties are weakened and the democratic forces have an uphill struggle. You complain about NEC and say that the code of conduct isnt enough but even if the laws were changed who is going to enforce them? The police and judiciary need to be reformed too. Do you really think that a presidential decree to freeze the security laws as the Juba parties demand would change anything? All this doesnt mean that being in favour the elections makes you an NCP supporter or a resident of cloud cuckoo land. If you want to wait for free and fair elections as good as Holland you are going to wait a long long time. After 20 years of living under the Inqaz we are all affected in many different ways and none of us are perfect. We have a difference of opinion on how to bring about democratization and let us discuss this civilly.
Dear Khalid
In any election you have mal-practices, but they must be kept to the level which doesn’t affect the over- all outcome, two years ago in UK they discover fraud in the postal voting and they hold people responsible to account and that didn’t affect the outcome of the election, in 1986, election in our constituency (46) Omdurman Bant Abu Seed , they was fraud by the NIF which lead to Dr Kablo win the consistency , but people managed to discover it and lunch a case in the court they about to win it only stopped by the NIF coup in 30 June 1989, at that time no one questioning the impartiality of the NEC, or the police, now everything if different and the attitude of the NEC raised many suspicions and questions that is the problem.
I have been studying the election process and all its rules for the last month as we managed to produce a detailed voters education manual and training DVD to educate voters about the very complicate voting system in the world , it is the NEC responsibility to ensure voters know how to vote , few example of how difficult is the system in a mock voting exercise an illiterate women in the south took 3 hours to vote 12 times as required in the south , a university student in Khartoum took him 20 minutes to complete the 8 ballot papers .
We don’t have to wait for 20 years or 10 years we don’t have to wait at all just apply the rules and close the loopholes, during my studies I managed to indentified more that 13 possibilities of frauds, what we are asking for is for the NEC to close those loopholes, and for creation of conducive elections so we can have fair play group. I speak in daily base with candidates from different political parties and views.
I don’t see any problem if we hold different opinion , everyone is entitle to his few, what I can’t understand is just to have any election for the sake it or just for complying with deadlines ,no point of having election if we know it is not going to represent the will of the majority.
Dear Lauren,
I was for the last 16 months an elections skeptic in terms of its import to the South, especially in view of the short timeframe before the elections. This article is not an analysis of how important the elections are to the South, but how candidates are engaging with them. For me what we are seeing in the South is that there is a genuine competition happening. Whether this will have positive or negative consequences, or indeed any serious consequence at all, remains to be seen.
Dear Rob,
The best of luck to your wife! Yes the elections are and will be fascinating to watch.
Dear Hafiz,
Thank you for your comments, all of which are founded on the basis of historical and factual knowledge. The question of implementation is perhaps the question of Sudan – it is always more difficult to do than to say. Yet for me the mindset of the opposition limits their ability to help move Sudan a little bit further along the path of recovery from the last decades, however small the step, and I think that should be their (and everyone’s) priority.
In my opinion, freedom is a state of mind. Sadly the NCP seems to be winning the battle when the oppositions’ minds are so focussed on what they don’t have, rather than what they do. As Khalid says we have a difference of opinion on how to democratize Sudan – I think you have to find a way to work with what you’ve got.
Dear All
It has been said by them of old that, “He who seeks the interest of others, has already secured his own.”
This has never as true as it is of the NCP and its search for democracy to-day, to the extent that the NCP Presidential Candidate lately claimed that “it was the Opposition Parties that delayed democracy in the Sudan for twenty years.” That the June 1989, coup leaders indeed “intended to re-establish the democratic system and reform it but were faced by the opposition from the political parties!”
The rush to this elections, is ascribed to the deadlines in the CPA.
Those of you who criticise the Opposition Parties are right, for these parties failed to see this coming, they ignored or misread the work the NCP started in preparation for this elections.
The NCP has always realized that it has to change and seek legitimacy, the CPA bestowed on them a degree of that. The Opposition,in the North,l ost all leverage, following the CPA,and indeed failed to take advantage of the CPA,some were openly critical of the CPA itself.
The CPA was concluded between the NCP as the de facto government and the SPLM/A in 2005.
Forums like the Juba All Party Conference should have been held as early as that time.This and much more,but once more let us not dwell on the past and continue apportioning blame.
On the other hand,the SPLM/A,seems to have withdrawn to the South, though they have a Presidential Candidate, indeed, VP Salvatore Kiir has stated that “the Referendum is more important for the South than the elections,” which caused this writer great anxiety, for has the SPLM/A settled on an outcome for the referendum and therefore does not worry much about what happens in the North? Does the SPLM/A still espouse a National Role or not?
Thus we see the NCP’s persistence on the elections, as if they know that it is either now or never.
Even at this eleventh hour,we see that this elections cannot be comprehensive and inclusive,they have already been delayed in South Kordofan, ironically because of the same reasons that should have put all the process on hold, namely the census.
There is also the Dar Fur issue. JEM is demanding the delay of the Elections, which under normal circumstances would be a fair demand.
There are the other Movements that are still out of the Peace Process, and without all the Movements, (even if they are a One-man Movement), one doubts if there will be peace in Dar Fur. Would any one expect the Fur to simply accept a Zaghawa domination? Would the Leader of the JEM, Khalil Ibrahim, have enough time, if he accepts the post of Advisor to the President, to rally the people of Dar Fur to the elections in April,and in any case, his spokesperson has already dismissed the Government’s reported offer and the N’Djamena talks ended in deadlock.
If this elections go on as planned then, they might very well be partial and this only serves the purposes of the two main parties of the peace process, the NCP and the SPLM/A, and this what many fear, the elections will lead to fragmentation of the Sudan.
It is my humble view,that it is up to the two parties, the NCP and SPLM/A to assume their national responsibilities, and address the National Issues. Would the NCP be ready to do that? I doubt. Would the SPLM/A assume its national character and do it, I hope so.
In his recent pronouncements, SPLM/A Presidential Candidate, Yasser Arman, said they don’t oppose delaying the elections if the NCP accepts.
Delaying the elections and even the referendum would by no means prejudice it’s results or change it’s options, but would create the peace necessary for any result the referendum may lead to.
I would end up by a wild question, but one i read in the writing of one who was once an active member of the NIF and served its post 1989 government, when he says, if a surprise happens and NCP loses the elections would they be ready to relinquish power, and give up all that they over the years acquired or would they unleash their militias and overturn the results?
Dear all
these thoughts may be incoherent and disjointed, please help me understand things better: How best can we solve our differences?
I found some of the argument here as disturbingly unrealistic.
David, I have always maintained a lot of respect for your writings and analysis and I still do, however, claiming that the NCP is determined to change and is keen to bring democracy and to secure legitimacy, sounds sounds like a joke to me – with all due respect.
Democracy, as democracy is or should be, has never been one of the agenda or intentions of any of the Sudanese political parties. Democracy is called for only when a party realizes that such a call will not jeopardizes its status quo, or rather would give some advantage to its image.
El-Beshir is simply using the word democracy because 1) he knows, and we all know, that he is well entrenched and fully loaded to secure his win in the coming elections, lawfully or unlawfully, and 2) because he is determined to stay in power and can not afford to lose.
Let us just realize that, NCP was in power for over two decades, but it never showed genuine interest in democracy nor given the opposition any chance to be involved in genuine democratic process in Sudan. NCP was never and will never accept to share power outside of its own undemocratic terms. Should the NCP seen any potential for the opposition to challenge it and win the election, the NCP would have been the first to call off these elections or to postpone them indefinitely.
By the same token, Kiir statement that the referendum is more important than the elections is also a case to the point. The SPLM calculations are very clear. The referendum is a GOD GIVEN opportunity that they can not afford to miss. The SPLM is aware that it has no interest in the North elections, but nevertheless they do not mind to give the NCP a bit of hard time and annoy Beshir by competing in the North elections while they are readily determined to get an independent South Sudan State out of the referendum. For all the internal issues in the South and the huge challenges that are facing its leadership role, the SPLM is also determined to win the South elections by all means, similar to the tendency of the NCP in the North, and the same way they are determined to get a separate state out of the referendum. While the NCP entrench behind empty rhetoric of democracy, the SPLM uses the rhetoric of the respect of the CPA.
Apart from this, and whether or not the rest of the other opposition parties call for the delay of the elections is a result of this realization, or a result of lack of preparedness, or both, that does not make them any different or any better, and does not give the Sudanese politics any genuine merits as far as the calls for democracy are concerned.
The reality of Sudan is that, there are two major forces in the political arena: one is represented by the wide spectrum of the political parties (NCP, the SPLM, and the rest of the opposition parties) that includes all, and who are hopelessly unable to grow up to the real challenges and requirements of democracy; and the other force is what we used to term as the “modern forces” which is striving always to make sense of nonsense out of the traditional and semi-traditional parties’ politics and mistakenly confuse the lightening of the coming thunder storm for the light at the end of the tunnel. My bet is on this force, but yet it has to challenge itself and to come to an organized and structured movement, for otherwise, change and democracy will remain a mere dream for Sudan and for the Sudanese.
I know this does not give a solution to the current problem at hand, but yes, I do not claim or believe that there is a short cut to the contemporary dilemma of Sudan. The elections will take place, Beshir will win, and the South will become a separate state. This is what I and many others believe is the coming scenario of events. Nothing we can suggest for the current political parties will change this reality, because simply none of them is able to bear the seed of the Sudan that we dream about.
Dear Ahmad Hassan and Hafiz Mohamed,
Again nay saying and negativity. To what avail? Democracy is born from struggle and compromise. I think its important to reflect on whether all the negative anti-Northern Sudan election campaigns people have vocalized has had any positive impact on today’s events. Yesterday, we were debating whether Sudan should have elections. Today, we are more concerned with free and fair elections. And I’m sure that tomorrow, we will complain about not winning the elections. There are parties in Sudan who are setting the stage up for failure, not knowing that their authoritarian views in this democratic forum may have grave implications for the democratic process of Sudan. There are other parties working at the grassroots, organizing, and vocalizing a constructive platform of dialog rather than constantly attacking the central authorities. This process shall move forward. It shall not be perfect… but then another one will come like it again.
Jamal
Dear Ahmed
Thank you very much,but that is not what I meant at all.
I missed a full sentence that reads:
“The same group that in June 1989, conspired against a democratically elected Government,though it had the second largest number of seats in the then Parliament, is now claiming to be the champion of democracy. The NCP Presidential Candidate, even claiming that “it was the opposition parties that delayed democracy for twenty years…”
Sorry for that.
I clearly stated that the NCP is seeking this elections taking advantage of the divisions within the other parties,which in a sense failed to read the situation properly. In so doing the NCP, is seeking it’s interest in legitimacy to perpetuate its rule and not for the sake of genuine democracy.
Unlike you, I still believe that we have to continue our debate, to avert the premonitions in your statement.
I however think, that the objective realities in the country to-day demand a new fresh look into all these arrangements, and it would be sad if the two parties to the CPA, go ahead with their plans, without taking into consideration the more paramount national interest.
You would also note that I am questioning the degree of readiness of the NCP to relinquish power in case it loses.
Dear David,
Your response makes absolute sense. I guess the misunderstanding was because of the missing sentence which made me feel that this is not the way you usually reflect your view. Apologies from my side as well.
Although I feel that the “paramount national interest” is the least concern of the of the two parties of the CPA, I nevertheless strongly feel that the debate should continue and both arguments, in favor of respecting the CPA timeframe for the elections and referendum or adjusting them for higher reasons of reaching peace and reconciliation, should be given equal and fair right to be considered and examined. This is albeit the fact that I am less optimistic than you regarding the outcome. But that should be a healthy difference of opinion.
There is a common belief that the majority of the political parties in Sudan are short sighted, but ingenious as far as their ragsball/socksball politics are concerned, politics which are rough yet domestically effective. Sudan politics actually remind me of Sherry Palmer in my favorite TV series 24, when President Palmer justified bringing her back to the While House circles because she is “experienced street fighter”, politically speaking, who might help with the inner circle conspiracies of the 3rd Day. Sherry Palmer political street fighting skills, non-ethical techniques, and amazing determination, provide a good resemblance for the petty politics of our Sudanese parties, reactionary and tactical but definitely not strategic enough to comprehend upper and higher national interests beyond their limited personal interests and what needs to be done to secure getting or not losing their portions of the pie before it is too late.
Your last question is legitimate, and no one in his or her right state of mind will doubt that Beshir and the NCP are going to give us a model sport loser. What we expect from them is even worse, a sheer case of “sour winners” cracking down on all the values that they are advocating now.
Thanks to Suleiman Rahhal who pointed my attention to the discussion taking place in this forum. The coming election in Sudan has a very predictable result which is the winning of the NCP and its ally SPLM. I say this because these two have planned very well for this election. They have not spared a lawful or unlawful means in getting themselves ready for it. The NCP are not a bunch of fools to let go of their control over everything in the country for the sake of democracy. They never believed in it when they made the coup in 1989 and there is nothing to suggest that there has been any change in their ideology up until now. They know 100 per cent that the opposition is so ill-prepared for this election. They made sure that they have 99 per cent chance in winning it, and that’s why they decided to go ahead with it.
My main concern is that the people are going to be the losers in this game. The south is likely to become a separate state despite the fact that this will be against the will of many people in the south and certainly against the majority of the people in the country as a whole. The split will have far reaching implications that will mostly be negative on both sides of the split. We will have minorities in the north, such as the Nuba and Fur, crushed by the new NCP government. We will also have a lot of power disputes in the south between SPLM and the opposition parties in the south. In the mist of all this, the human rights will be ignored. Economic, health and social development will be completely forgotten particularly for minorities areas such as the Nuba Mountains and Darfur.
Good post, it sums up feelings in the south well: it IS exciting, more than many expected it to be.
I’d just add that I think southern interest – and discomfort – is rising in part because of how well the situation now highlights feelings of loyalty and “connectedness” for the leading SPLM, in many, that are mixed up with concerns about how democratic the existing authorities are prepared to be.
Strong-arming of independent candidates by security agents, arrests of party agents: it’s worrying. While some people accepted that soldiers might have to get rough to disarm people, that corruption cases could be set aside for the greater good, this really does seem simply unfair, uncomfortable. Or if you think this is ok, then maybe you have to fact up to the fact that you’re not really democratic, which you may not have had to do before.
And if policemen and security agents are picking on independents and arresting other party agents and radio station managers without being told to then that’s also worrying. Journalists have been told for 5 years now that authoritarian practices are a hangover from the war, not meant i.e. not meant by the people in the very top.
Independents and other parties may not win. But by speaking out about their experiences in campaigns they may do some damage to structures created or allowed by.
I think, Ms Erasmus, given ongoing events, you had better reconsider your views. Power has always been retained in the center because, as you say, there is no leveled or fair playing field. It is very natural for the opposition to stick to politicking and campaigning in Khartoum.
Furthermore, I ask you to consider if any optimism that you perceive in the south may come from the imminence of independence. The current regional elections are seen as a rite of passage of what the newly-birthed independent southern Sudanese state will look like. Excitment can turn to quick anger and frustration once the referendum dates are threatened to be pushed. Therefore, I would be cautious in your assessment.
One read of your article and it is obvious that you are artificially and self-deceivingly holding the Southern Sudanese political developments in such high esteem. I hope Southern Sudan’s structural advancements measure up to such praise.
I suppose you are right. What Northern Sudanese need is a good dose of indomitable spirit, underdog narrative, and a sprinkle of self-belief to bring down this Khartoum regime. Maybe it’s time to let the South separate so we can get on with it.