The ruling regime and the interdependence of charters

The ruling regime and the interdependence of charters

D. Suleiman Muhammad Al-Diblo

The Jeddah Framework Agreement did not run dry until the people of Sudan began to cheer in support of its virtues and in recognition of its negatives out of concern for the future of Sudan. I was one of those who followed this approach and I am full of hope in the credibility of what was agreed upon, considering that Sudan deserves to assume its historical position and prominence in today’s world. However, the news and reports carried by the media dashed these hopes, and unfortunately made me place it among the piles of agreements and maneuvers.

On the part of the assembly, its membership of parties and bodies quickly supported the advantages and stopped at the negatives, which eliminates any shadow of doubt that the agreement was not an agreement between the assembly and the government, but rather an agreement between the president of the assembly, the head of the Democratic Unionist Party, the first deputy and the actual head of the ruling party, which is unfortunate. Otherwise, how do we explain the statement of the Communist Party, the Federal Party, the People’s Movement, and the bilateral agreement of the Eastern Sudan faction?

On the other hand, we find that the government ignored the most important elements of the agreement at its core (ensuring freedom of pluralistic political action, freedom of expression and the press, trade union and professional work, and human rights covenants). What is the value of this agreement if the regime does not hesitate to raid and confiscate media buildings, equipment, and equipment, arrest media professionals, and confiscate newspapers (Al-Ayyam and Al-Jazeera); Moreover, it is as if the agreement gave the regime the desired impetus to escalate the burning of villages, the displacement and killing of Darfur citizens. This is being done at a time when the assembly was unable to form its negotiating delegation, even after forming its committee to negotiate with the government: Will the representatives of the assembly be guaranteed their freedom to negotiate, or will their fate be the fate of those from Darfur who were arrested, especially since the opinion of the assembly has been declared on the Darfur issue? From all of this, I have doubts about the government’s credibility regarding the general principles it has signed, which it is far from capable of implementing. Rather, the signing was only from the perspective of strengthening the negotiating capacity and increasing the value of money.

The behavior and political approach that has taken place so far in the negotiating arena and the maneuvers that have taken place do not bode well for the sake of which the people of Sudan have risen above all the disadvantages of the agreements and trends that have emerged in the hope of stopping the bleeding of hostilities and fighting and looking forward to the dawn of a day when Sudan will be on the threshold of growth, development and stability. Anyone who follows the approach that was followed in negotiating the fate of the people of Sudan from both sides of the fighting (the Popular Movement and the Popular Defense) from Machakoush and through Jeddah to Machakush confirms one fact, which is that the two negotiating parties deal with the issue as if it were a partnership between two institutions, with each institution taking into account the desired benefit from this partnership for its institution only, away from those slogans of dismantling a civilized system to a new Sudan. How can we believe you when signing is the easiest thing to guarantee non-implementation? How can we believe you? For 15 years, we have lived through the cheering and trumpeting of agreement and disagreement, while at the same time torture and displacement.

The news about the agreement on dividing wealth is shameful and frustrating for all the people of Sudan. I was among many who believed that the national sense of the negotiators would prevail over their front-line interests (the Popular Movement Front/the Islamic Front Front). I expected that the wealth agreement would be on the mechanism and programs of the country's development, not on what is my right and my share. Yes, I thought the time had come for the negotiators to realize the aspirations of the people of Sudan, which led them to agree to anything that would end the state of instability and allow Sudan to emerge from the center of darkness, war, and fighting.

Yes, I expected that the negotiators would surprise us, contrary to media expectations, by agreeing on programs to develop the country. We expected that the agreement would be 20% to connect Sudan to a transportation and communications network, 10% to reform education from kindergarten to higher, vocational and technical, 15% to build hospitals and provide medicine and treatment for the sick people of Sudan, 5% to develop agriculture and livestock, 5% to preserve Sudan’s environment and stop the slide of desertification, 5% to rehabilitate the police and establish citizen security services to sponsor him in his orientation to production and work, and 25% to develop industry and its inputs. From energy to raw materials, restoring the production of factories that we stopped in Karima, Atbara, Anzara, Babanusa, and Lagawa, and establishing factories and complexes in all regions of Sudan, each according to its nature and data, and 10% for irrigation, both flowing and rainwater, and underground, and 3% for fighting AIDS, which may prevent us from implementing our ambitious programs. Let the remaining 2% be a gift and appreciation from the Sudanese people to the two institutions of the negotiators and for the life of Sudan. I hope that you do not underestimate the percentage, as it will be rewarding with the satisfaction of the people of Sudan, and contentment is definitely better than greed. If you took this approach, the people of Sudan would raise you above their heights and make you the founders of the new Sudan. By God, if only this were your approach, all the sons of this great people would each return to their homes with their sleeves rolled up to raise this great country.

Brother Colonel John Garang, you know that this people definitely does not care about the president, but what matters is what this president offers them. If you want to be an eternal ruler of the new Sudan, all of Sudan, then provide them with the reasons for its prosperity, progress, and development. Brother Counselor, First Deputy, I have known the people of Sudan to be tolerant and selfless. If you ever want them to register you in Sudan’s registry, give the people of Sudan, all of Sudan, reasons for tolerance. And let there be Sudan in your eyes, all of Sudan. You are now negotiating as statesmen for all, away from partisanship, sectarianism, regionalism, or fanaticism. Go in this direction, and there will be no problem of marginalized areas, contact areas, or backward areas. Our goodness is for everyone, and it must be shared by all. Go in this direction, and realize the dream of a lush, developed, advanced, and recovering Sudan instead of the sick man of Africa. In this alone, we will have created a moral justification for the millions who died during our war, and a justification. Logically, due to the crushing and destruction that we have inflicted on our homeland since the dawn of its independence, thus uniting the people of all Sudan for reconciliation that rises above the bitterness of the past, with the hope of a bright Sudan in which people with equal rights and duties coexist under the shadows of freedom and dignity.

Continued: Security arrangements for separation