columns

Worries on Sudan’s Future

Dr. Elshafie Khidir Saeid

For a while now, several groups within and outside Sudan have been active in launching initiatives that seek a safe way out for the country from its current crisis.  Personally, I do call for a positive interaction with any of these initiatives as long as:

  1. they are launched from platforms, institutions, or personalities, that enjoy the respect of everyone
  2. these initiatives acknowledge that the present acute political crisis in the country was triggered by the 25th of October coup, and the country has been dragged into a dead-end tunnel threatening in the first place the security and the safety of its people.
  3. these initiatives seek to curb violence and bloodshed, and to paralyze the hands that oppress the citizens and peaceful youth
  4. Any of these initiatives work to achieve consensus on mechanisms that are at the forefront of their top priorities is to restore the course of the transitional period in the direction of realizing the slogans of the glorious December revolution represented in liquidating all forms and foci of the former regime, walking along the pathway of the democratic transformation, enabling the civil rule, and exerting every effort to spare the country the catastrophes of bloody conflicts and civil wars.

However, while welcoming these various initiatives, one should observe a real concern about the multiplicity of these initiatives, especially those coming from outside Sudan, a phenomenon of which I call the “initiatives shopping”. The multiplicity of the initiatives may create confusion and wasting of the priorities regarding the issues of the crisis and may put the country in the zone of conflicts of interests. We believe that the best for our country is the unification of these initiatives, with the diversity of their stages and mechanisms, and that is why we strongly support the United Nations initiative led by “UNITAMS”, and we are calling for its strong coordination with the initiative of Sudanese Universities Chancellors, which also we do support, bearing in mind that it has made great strides in communicating with all the forces of change in the country, and heading towards finding the commonalities between these forces to reach a unified political discourse.

It is noticeable that most of the political actors & initiatives in the country are calling for a Round Table Conference as a mechanism to reach a consensus on the most suitable way out of this crisis. It is worth saying that we previously, in May 2020, had proposed, in an article, such a round table conference in response to our analysis saying that the transitional period, at that time, reached a dead end. But, I do believe that any initiative and any Round Table Conference will be meaningless and a futile exercise unless each one of them takes off and proceeds from two main assumptions: Firstly, the military-civilian partnership formula which has governed the transitional period since its inception, has completely failed. The second assumption is the necessity of a unified will for change in a unified platform and under a unified leadership. Once again, and in this regard, I highly appraise the initiative of the Sudanese Universities Chancellors, which is making a great effort to create common ground among the civil forces of change, regardless of the size or the theses of any of these forces.

Yes, Sudan needs every genuine help in search of an effective safe way out to confront the dangerous situation in which the country has been detained for long, which is becoming more dangerous with the inability and incapability of the Sudanese political actors due to their fragmentations and divisions.

Back to top button