Sudan: No Easy Ways Ahead
A new report from the Heinrich Boll Foundation, Sudan: No Easy Ways Ahead, contains essays by leading Sudanese scholars and analysts of Sudan.
Towards the end of the six-year interim period defined in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), Sudan is potentially sliding into yet another crisis. The general elections in April – the first in 24 years – represent a rare test of confidence for the country’s incumbent elites. For many observers, however, the elections are merely a prelude to the referendum on the future status of South Sudan scheduled for early 2011.
Both the general elections and the referendum come at the end of a transitional period that has, in many ways, been more about stagnation than about transition. The implementation of the CPA has often been delayed and was marred by a lack of trust between its signatories: the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM). As a consequence, the agreement has largely failed to realize democratic transformation and to make the unity of the country attractive. Instead, political tensions in the run-up to the elections indicate that older conflicts still persist, and that the referendum will only reconfigure challenges. The already fragile situation could easily trigger a new outbreak of violence. It is therefore of the utmost urgency to prepare for the post-CPA period in Sudan. In discussions about the future of the country, and in the day-to-day business of diplomats and international observers, the perspective beyond 2011 has only recently started to receive attention. Not all events of the coming years are fully predictable, of course. Yet it is possible to delineate potential scenarios, and to identify the political options they open up for different actors
It is a very interesting and thought-provoking report, it raises the issues that should have been discussed by the Sudanese long before the elections, and the referendum, however, it is not too late, even though,we have only 8 months remaining before the secession is sealed, for from what one can deduce from the SPLM/A policies, it seems the movement decided to withdraw into the South.
It is a pity that we no more have a John Garang.
It sad, that none in the SPLM/A seems willing to understand why John Garang, was for unity, despite all the mistakes and injustices of the past.
In the history of Nubia, when the kingdoms of the North failed, the Kingdoms of the South assumed their responsibility, and moved in and saved the situation.
In the 8th Century BC, King Piankhy, moved up north and esablished the 25th Dynasty and retored order to then fragmenting almost disintegrating Kingdom.
David’s comment on this topic merits consideration. Despite the many injustices suffered by the people of Southern Sudan there may still be merit in a unified Sudan, not only for the North, but for the South as well.
It is an interesting point that David makes about the 25th Dynasty of the great ancient Nile Valley civilization. An examination will show that several of the “high points†in what is termed “Egyptian†civilization were sparked by the infusion of vitality from the south. From Narmar’s pre-dynastic uniting the upper an lower Nile over 5 thousand years ago to the initiation of the Late Period by the 25th Dynasty in the eighth century B.C.E. Perhaps this history could be considered in weighing whether a unified Sudan, beneficial to all, is feasible.
But more important than the ancient historical context is the modern day context in which the people of Southern Sudan must make their decisions when voting in the Referendum.
A story comes to mind that may be relevant. It is a story often repeated in the U.S. even though it is crude to a certain degree; and I apologize in advance for this story if it offends anyone.
The story tells of a small bird that flies into a barn in a northern American state in the dead of winter. The bird was near death from the frigid cold and asked for help from a cow that was in the barn. The cow responded by evacuating its bowels and covering the small bird in a steaming pile of manure. The bird was outraged and cursed the cow for trapping it in such a filthy situation. The next morning, when the frigid night had ended, the bird was still alive, having been kept warm by the pile of manure. Early that same morning a cat happened by and the bird pleaded with the cat to rescue it from the pile of manure. The cat obliged and plucked the bird from the odious mess and cleaned it thoroughly. The cat cleaned every feather immaculately. And once the bird was completely clean, the cat popped it into its mouth and ate it. The moral of this story being: Not everyone who sticks you into a pile of manure does so because he is your worst enemy and not everyone who removes you from that pile of manure dose so because he is your best friend.
Those foreign interests who urge Southern Sudan to separate from the North may be doing so out of their interest in the South’s well being, but it should not be ASSUMED that this is the case.
Hon.Deng Alor Kuol, Sudan FM said last year that it would be a miracle to see the North and South remain a united Country after 2011.
It was a very honest conclusion from a person who knows deep inside Sudan politics.
I understand the desire of people like Oscar and David to see the Sudan united but as a typical South Sudanese who bore the horrors of war for 17 years and who had listened to older Southerners descibing their injustice since 1956, it is better to let go all the goodies that we Southerners may (though unlikely) get from the united Sudan.
For 54 years our Northern rulers have not learned what it take to live with a person who is socially different from you. They have funished us, discriminate us and exploited us for being different from them. If all that we can show for 54 years of unity are 2 million dead, no roads, no hospitals, not school, and oil exploited from the South to develop the North, then it is realistically better to part ways so that we can try to govern ourselves and develop our own resources.
Some people can fancy say that the future relation between the North and South can not be determine just by the past. However, the current situation is just like 20 years ago.Bashir is the defacto leader of the North, NCP is the only party in power and they perceived their election win as an endorsement of their Sharia law by the Northern people. Prof Ibrahim Gandour said in the Sudan debate on Aljezeera that the overwhelming election of NCP candidates is an indication that people want sharia policies.
If that is the case in the North,then good for them.Bashir got only 10% of votes in the South. All the NCP candidates in the South lost election at all levels.My opinion is that separation is good for both North and the South so that the Northerners can implement their Sharia as they wish without objection.Southerners on the other hand can have their secular system as they wish.They will not again fight the North to impose the secular policies.
As a Southerner,I don’t see any argument that can convince the people of South Sudan to vote for unity.Bashir came to the South during the compaign to convince Southerners with his hollow promises of development. That promise fall plate when you consider that under the current arrangement,the North take half of the oil produced in the South. NCP even steals from that remaining half that is suppose to belong to Southerners. So by develop,he asks Southerners to vote for unity so that they can continue giving the North 50%.
On the other hand there are Southerners living in Khartoum and the way NCP treat them say a lot about Bashir’s promises to Southerners. They are the poor manual labourers. They live in the dirtiest part of the city ( some people even call their camps “black belt”).
Oscar .H.Blayton, your story is a very unfair characterisation of people’s struggle against oppression and injustice. For your information, the liberation struggle of the people of South Sudan against various regimes in the North was not inspired by some foriegn agenda. It was and still is a struggle against a situation that is unbearable. Some of you who read about South Sudan in the news should ask yourself, “why do people subject themselves to series of war for decades against an opponent which is more sophisticated than them?” The people of South Sudan (women, children, youth, old) do not need a foriegn lecture as far as the North-South conflict is concerned.
To reply to your story,the people of South Sudan have seen what 54 years of unity brought to them: lack of development, oppression and 2 million dead. There is nothing imaginable that can be worse after independent than what happened in the last 54 years of unity.
Dear Yong,
President Al-Bashir got 10% of the votes in the south and one of those votes was from Salva Kiir! 90% of the southerners voted for Yasir Arman because they know that Al-Bashir can NEVER be trusted to deliver on a free and fair referarendum for south Sudan. What is worse than the last 54 years of war is another broken promise! That is why the SPLM is standing firm with the Juba Alliance in refusing to recognize this election.
Muawia
Muawia,
Whether Bashir was overwhelmingly elected or he rigged his way to the presidency,whether the Juba Aliance recognises the election or not, Bashir is the defacto president of North Sudan now.
SPLM will find a way to deal with him for the next 8 months so that he implements the CPA.
The NCP signed the CPA with SPLM to bring many decades of war to an end. If the NCP abrogates the agreement at the last minute,then there is no doubt the country will go back to war.
To us in the South, we do not truth Bashir to relinquish the 50% oil his government takes from the South. However, the liberation struggle of the people of South Sudan does not depend on whether the South trust which party in Khartoum. It is something we have to achieve at the end.
Dear Yong Deng, I did not mean to imply that the struggle of the people of South Sudan is not legitimate nor inspired by the desire of the people in South Sudan to redress injustices which they have suffered over the decades. Nor do I deem myself competent to lecture the people of Sudan (North or South) on the affairs within their own country, and I apologize if I appeared to do so.
The point of my comment and my tale of the suffering bird was to raise a warning against accepting assistance from those who may wish to be seen as friends of South Sudan only to serve their own self interests. The people of South Sudan must choose its friends carefully so as to always promote what is best for the people of South Sudan.
I hope this clarifies what I was trying to say in my earlier post.
Best regards,
Oscar
Three points about this very well written and well edited report .
1- There is no inevitability about the result of the referendum .All the options are still wide open Much can happen between today and January 2011. Many who advocated secession now have doubts,in the light of what happened in the New Sudan in the last 5 years.I am glad that a Southern academic (Dr Yoh)has openly voiced what many in the diaspora , and in the West whisper.Alex de Waal thinks extending the six months after tha referendum will solve the dilemma.By how many years?Remember that the transitional period suggested by the government during negotiations was 10 years ;but the impatient SPLM didnt agree.
2-The reports did NOT do justice to the position of women(25% of the seats) and Proportional Representation. Mixing First-Past -The -Post with Proportional Representation is an idea worthy of presentation to Nick Clegg and his competitors in the British debates.by adopting this formula Sudan avoids the defeciences of the Isralei and British systems .As far as women are concerned Sudan is now a pioneer .We will have 112 women at least in parliament.
3- References to the Regional factors were adequate; but the main point has not been elucidated,namely,that the fault line in Western policies towards Sudan is that our country is viewed mainly through the Arab-Israeli conflict. Accusations of smuggling arms to Hamas ,and being an ally of Iran are part of this outlook . In an TV programme about the Israeli attack on a convoy of illegal immigrants in North Eastern Sudan ; I said to a British-Israeli journalist that Israel could have alerted Egypt in order to wait for the convoy; ,confiscate the weapons and catch Sudan red-handed . A writer in Haaretz claimed that the whole exercise was designed to boost the morale of IDF forces.
The campaign to isolate and sanction Sudan(including the almost irrational support for the ICC prosecutor ) is part of this pattern .Yesterday there was a US report about the visit of twenty-three African Entrepreneurs to Washinton where they were welcomed by President Obama. No Sudanese was among them , despite our free market economy and positive IMF reports.
dear Khalid AlMubarak:
you can choose to live in denial, or wake up to the realities at hand. Yes you may be right, but as far as popular opinion is concerned, most of southern Sudanese are poised to vote overwhelmingly for independence.
And on the issue of extending the transition period six months to four more years, to make it ten years as originally intended by then NIF now NCP, “Remember that the transitional period suggested by the government during negotiations was 10 years; but the impatient SPLM didnt agree.”
The question is then, given the past 5 and half years of transition period, political bickering, manuevering, each side contantly trying to out manuever the other sidze, without any clear vision or solution to the outstanding problem: what is the point of extending it? Shouldn’t it be easier if we go through the referendum? and go our separate ways if that is the verdict?