As stipulated in Juba Peace Agreement, The Centre’s Path, and North Path will get 30% of the revenues.
For the benefit of our readers who do not know the (Paths), we say that the parties of Juba talks divided the negotiations to (paths) i.e. Darfur Path, The Two Areas path, East Sudan Path, Centre’s Path, and North Path.
The idea is circulated to justify that each region has its privacy which should be considered in the negotiations, but it is obvious that the purpose is the increase the quotas of each region in wealth-share.
The Darfur Path has got 40 of the region’s resources against 60% for the central government in Khartoum.
Now the Centre’s and North Paths will get 30% of the region’s revenues against 70% for the central government in Khartoum.
This is an unbelievable slope in the Sudanese absurd theater.
Those politicians who are practicing the dividing of wealth-share are showing their failure before they exercise their power in reality because they not only endeavored to dedicate regionalism but they did not recognize the fatalities of such divisions.
However, Sudan is one patch owned by one people, so it would be better to share the revenues as one patch and not like what is understood from the wealth-share protocol to share the spoils.
There is no logic in allocating 40% of Darfur’s revenues to the regional government, as a free-of-mind calculation may make Darfur the highest in Sudan in terms of the return on investment.
The same applies to the Centre and North paths.