The Way Out

Omer B. Abu Haraz

Sudan is now in a precarious juncture that might lead to slipping in chaos, anarchy, and disintegration. This dreadful situation is a result of a widening rift between the two partners of the revolution which ousted the strong salvation regime on April 11, 2019, after four months of popular unprecedented demonstrations in almost all parts of the country.

Two reasons or more specifically two grave mistakes led to the creation of the rift.

One is the shortsightedness of the civilian partner, – Forces of freedom and Change (FFC)in the division of power between the civilians and the military. Any division is either transverse or longitudinal. The FFC unaware of the consequences of the choice of either division opted for the longitudinal. This type of division is perfect in a homogeneous and symmetrical body between two identical partners of the same densities. In chemistry, a homogeneous solution can only be made of two elements with the same densities. For example, oil and water can never form a mixture because the densities are different. Whatever vigorous shaking of a cup containing oil and water the two are always separated after stopping shaking, oil stands on top of the water.

The civilian partners of a higher density and the military are lower. The ideal division should have been transverse. The military on top is a Sovereign Council in the palace with limited duties like any parliamentary system of governance. The civilian share is the executive ruling. The longitudinal division of power led to the hybrid Sovereignty Council and share of its presidency after the elapse of half the transitional period. The military partner couldn’t tolerate accepting relinquishing of power after enjoying logical supremacy in that period.

The beauty of the transverse division is tint both partners have separated rules in the transitional governance without any possibility of trespassing of either partner into the domain of the other.

This is exactly what happened in the two previous transitional periods 1969 – 1965 after October 1964 revolution and 1985 – 1986 after April 1985 revolution. Both transitional periods passed smoothly to general elections because the division of power was transverse.

The second grave mistake by FFC was the unfortunate departure from the Constitutional Document when amending the article of a technocrat non-partisan member of the council of ministers. The amendment allowed the selection of partisan members from only four partners. This embittered the other FFC elements.

So, the safe way-out is drafting a new constitutional document on the basis of a transverse division of powers between the two partners – civilian and military with unequivocal articles demarcating this transverse division with the military alone for the Sovereign Council till the end of the transitional period; rule of a non-partisan government

Secondly, removing the four tracks of the Juba Agreement of October 2020 and calling for comprehensive and inclusive negotiations about the East Sudan conflict.

Thirdly, calling for negotiations with SPLM-N of Al-Hilu and SLM of Abdulwahid in Khartoum as soon as possible.

Back to top button