Is the path of peace alone or separation?

We must take a careful look at the path taken by the Sudanese political forces in the recent era to achieve the agreements that were signed, in the hope of averting a brutal war that claimed a huge number of Sudanese people in the north and south, and disrupted the wheel of development and progress and contributed to destroying much of the Sudanese heritage of existing infrastructure or service institutions. Rather, it changed the prevailing thinking about Arab-African-Islamic Sudan, and highlighted and deepened understanding. Realizing a civil, African, ethnic Sudan, with the need for everyone to coexist in it according to their beliefs, religions, and races according to extremely precise and sensitive standards, requires great care and unlimited detachment, the goal of which is to ensure the unity of Sudan within its current borders. Any defect in one of these standards will inevitably lead to the disintegration of the unity nodes and the dispersion of the grains of the cluster.

Naivasha Protocols and legitimate questions

The road to peace was long. Since the dawn of independence, and the eruption of the first demands of the South from the North, which led to a deep wound in the unity of the people of the country until the signing of the final agreement, covenants and covenants were signed, all of which helped heal the wound, but they did not contribute to stopping the bleeding. The wound continued to deepen, healing for a little while, until it exploded again, sweeping away and claiming the lives of innocent people.

What prompted me to write these lines are questions that have been troubling me and still are: Will the Naivasha peace agreement be the healing balm for this wound, or is it one of those bandages that we are accustomed to applying to it? Was this agreement drawn up purely for implementation, or was it drawn up only to reach a certain stage in history? Will we have the will to implement this agreement with a degree of serenity, patriotism, and moral commitment, or is it just ink on paper like other agreements? The most important question is: Are the Naivasha agreements, understandings, and protocols really a balm for solving Sudan’s problem, or are there motives and ambitions that have not been revealed through these packages?

So that the matter does not become more complex, I decided to limit myself to what came between the lines of the six recent agreement packages, taking the outcome of the previous attempts in the recent era, starting from Abuja to Jeddah, crossing through Asmara, Cairo, Berlin, Sweden, Britain, America, Khartoum, Shakdoum, Fashoda, Djibouti, Geneva, and Tripoli of the West, and the maneuvers that took place between these intersecting lines.

What is striking is that all the efforts made in the recent era (from the first day of rescue until the signing of the Naivasha Agreement), regardless of whether they are northern or southern, partisan or civil society, all converge at one point, which is to win the affection of the Popular Movement, and thus she has become the undisputed Haifa of the neighborhood, competing for her. It made its leader Dr. John Garang John Garang is the knight who brags about trying to win his affection. Since the first day of the Salvation Government, and despite the declared hostilities, efforts have been made by all political forces to reach out to the movement. These efforts culminated in the Abuja meetings but did not yield the desired results. At the same time, the northern opposition became active and its efforts succeeded in getting the movement to accept working within the framework of the National Assembly. The First Gulf War contributed to expanding the role of the grouping regionally. The movement benefited from this and thus gained a regional dimension that took it from a narrow southern regional movement to a nationalist movement with a northern dimension. This enabled it to establish its position and frame the work of its embassies. This is in addition to its extensive presence in Western European countries and America. When the noose tightened on the Khartoum government, it was necessary for it to find alternatives that would alleviate the burden of the opposition internationally and internally. So it resorted to countries outside the Western axis and made a great effort to produce oil, hoping that by doing so it would reduce the costs of the war and reduce the burden of the internal opposition resulting from economic pressures. By producing oil, a new dimension was added to the ongoing war in Sudan. The government benefited from the economic margin that the oil product provided it, improving its military capabilities, and began to employ the surplus of it to fragment the opposition. It succeeded in establishing friendly forces as well as concluding the Khartoum Agreement, which it followed with Fashoda. These agreements were of great importance not only in weakening the Popular Movement, but also in breaking the international embargo that it was facing. They opened channels of communication that eased the burden of the embargo on it.

NDA and calculated penetration

On the other hand, despite the political momentum and international acceptance that the gathering had, in reality it was a pile of political contradictions, which Dr. John Garang consciously and consciously. The movement’s entry into the assembly gave it the umbrella and the northern political dimension, and at the same time it preserved for itself the specificity of the south. It was Dr. John Garang negotiates away from the gathering about the south, and proclaims his ideas about the new Sudan. The assembly had no choice but to guarantee what it said. In fact, there was a hidden struggle between the president of the National Assembly and its Secretary-General to win the favor of Dr. John Garang, which enabled the government to infiltrate the assembly through the Secretary-General of the assembly, who fought for the Umma Party’s exit from it. As a result of these contradictions, there was no sane person among the group who contained the problem. Rather, by settling accounts, the matter found internal satisfaction. With the departure of the Umma Party, the rally weakened and all its efforts were paralyzed until it became an enlightenment forum at the invitation of Dr. John Garang whenever necessary.

The bottom line is that in the end, the rescue got rid of its godfather, and Dr. John Garang from its consequences and negotiations began for the birth of the so-called New Sudan.

Brief pictures and models

During this period, the Sudanese nation faced great calamities. At home, the citizen was afflicted with unimaginable poverty, hunger, and poverty. Education became for those who had it, treatment for those who had the means, and human freedom for those who were given. Within the country, regiments after regiments died; Within the country, power, wealth, and weapons became regionalized except when needed, and the shapes of the people of Sudan changed to take on various colors.

As for outside the country, the situation is not better than inside it, as for the first time in the history of Sudan, its people are dispersed throughout all parts of this globe from the South Pole to the North, until there is not a single country devoid of Sudanese, so that striking the oil pipeline has become an honor reported by news agencies and statements, and killing our people in Hamashkorib is the pinnacle of the struggle, and on top of that, spying and selling information about the homeland falsely and slander is an honor that we praise and bear witness in the media. As for deceiving the simple people of our people in southwest Sudan, who are honored to be accompanied by Baroness Cox, to frame us with the accusation of slavery, this is an honor used by truly naive and suspicious proverbs.

This is the situation in which we reached the peace agreement, and I will leave to the reader its contents, implications, and repercussions on the agreement and the future of the country, noting that the parties are the same parties that took over Sudan from the dawn of independence until the present day.

A frank and courageous stand with the peace protocols in Naivasha

This is a necessary introduction to talking about peace agreement packages. I will discuss these agreements in detail according to their historical sequence, starting with the Nuba Mountains Agreement and ending with the Nairobi Declaration, in a separate article. In this article, I will limit myself to focusing on the general implications of these agreements, the negatives and the positives.

Advantages of agreement

* These agreements are the first agreements signed to solve the Sudan problem under international supervision (the Security Council) and monitoring by countries of global importance, which may guarantee the seriousness of implementation.

* The agreements contributed to stopping the war and fighting in the south of the country, which will have a positive effect in stopping the bloodshed and treating the nasty wound, and will give the people of Sudan, if intentions are good, an opportunity to understand the origins of the Sudan problem and then develop radical solutions to the problem.

Risks, drawbacks and disadvantages

* The most dangerous thing about these agreements is that they were based on the premise of separation, so their details are unclear, and many of them are subject to disagreement and inevitably lead to the goal of establishment.

* The agreements came according to a timetable imposed on the negotiations to be part of an election campaign that we have nothing to do with.

* The agreements were characterized by exclusivity between the National Congress and the People’s Movement/Army in an exclusionary manner, and did not leave any line of return that would enable those concerned in the south and north and in the hotbeds of tension in the country to participate. There was only a small favor and crumbs for the rest of the political forces and civil society organizations, and for the transition period (six years). Unfortunately, the agreement depends on the capabilities and aspirations of the people of Sudan only on the capabilities and aspirations of the signatories, and everyone knows that none of the signatories bear the consensus of the people of Sudan in the north or south.

* For the first time in the history of conflicts, the country’s wealth and the authority to implement it were distributed regionally according to the borders of secession. If the concern had been for the country’s unity, the distribution would have been based on eliminating the effects of discord, such as poverty, hunger, disease, ignorance, mismanagement, and the subsequent corruption through development programs that would lift the country from the bottom of backwardness to the thresholds of just and parallel development and development. Thus alone would the fire of strife be extinguished and the wounds of Sudan healed.

* In addition to securing the borders of the south of the country, the agreements extended to pockets inside the north and failed to be comprehensive as they ignored what was going on in the northwest of the country, did not address what was going on in the east of the country, and did not clarify the aspirations of the rest of Sudan’s regions.

Rationale for national consensus and guarantees of sustainable peace

Despite the negatives of these agreements, the entire Sudanese people cheered them and rejoiced in their goodness in view of what this generous people suffered until, after fifty years since their independence, they became among the poorest countries in the world, and the bulldozer of demolition struck all its components. Yes, the entire Sudanese people welcomed it, hoping that the signatories would exude themselves with impartiality and a high sense of patriotism that would push the optimism of the people of Sudan to the goals of advancement and progress. In order to overcome the negatives of these agreements and consolidate their positives, we must acknowledge that the war that took place in Sudan affected all our capabilities and resulted in bitterness that requires a lot of effort to overcome. Although its direct effects were in the south, and on the theaters of operations in central Sudan, it extended to all parts of the country, stopping the wheel of development and growth.

To overcome the negatives, the signatories are responsible for the following

* The necessity of transforming these agreements, with impartiality and good intent, from a bilateral one to a national one in which there is a place for every loyal patriot. We must reject narrow political bidding while being fully keen to stay away from the greed of some self-interested people, political brokers and plunderers of public money, to include all sectors of the Sudanese people so that they can protect them and be keen to implement them. Only by doing this can we close the door on anyone who dares to rebel or turn against them.

* It is necessary to address the problem of the northwest of the country, and the hotbeds of unrest in the south and north, and include it in the core of these agreements so that the treatment is general for all the people of Sudan.

* It is necessary to involve all national political forces, parties, civil society organizations and regions, to bear their historical responsibility in building a new Sudan that is multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious. The criterion should be how much we give to build the country and not how much we take from it. We are all sons of one nation, even if our convictions, customs and ethnicities differ.

* We must work to implement these agreements through a broad-based national unity government in order to implement an agreed-upon comprehensive development program to change the pattern of poverty and backwardness with a pattern of progress, development and growth.

* The country’s wealth must be utilized nationally through well-thought-out projects that connect the country with a transportation network from the far south in Nimule to Halfa in the north, and from Port Sudan in the east to El Geneina in the west, which will be intertwined to connect all parts of the country.

* Education must also be developed in every region and governorate, in order to eliminate illiteracy and transform education from a cheap trade into an undisputed constitutional right.

* It is necessary to build human, animal and environmental health facilities in order for our humans and animals to become well-being and to contribute positively to the construction.

* We must have a plan to develop our human resources and a plan to develop our natural resources that varies with the diversity of our resources in the country, from agricultural, mining, tourism, animal, marine, water, etc., specific to the extent of the transition, with the aim of making the most of all these resources to lift Sudan from its abyss of backwardness to the thresholds of development.

* We must divert all the energies of our soldiers and militias from fighting to building to the construction process.

* Above all of this, we must have true brotherhood, neither northern nor southern, nor western, nor eastern, nor any classification in between. We are all Sudanese. Let pride and distinction be given to those who give impartially, and let Sudan remain the homeland and nothing else above everyone else’s minds.

For a comparative study of these proposals, see: The Sudanese Liberal Party’s program to resolve the current crisis in Darfur The Sudanese Liberal Party's program to resolve the crisis in Darfur

Continue

Declaration of principles Contributions in Arabic |Contributions in English | Reference documents | Reference papers | Invitation to contribute