columns

Desperate Diseases Need Desperate Remedies

Muawad Mustafa Rashid

The post-independence political regimes have completely collapsed at all levels. The traditional pro-independence political parties witnessed widespread fragmentation and their programs had ended with the rising of the national flag in 1956. After that, there was complete disorder in the political arena which led to a continuous vicious circle of the democratic, military, democratic uprising, military regimes, and so on for more than six decades.

The restructuring of the Sudanese State that takes into consideration all the developments that occurred during the more than six decades is the only solution. Some of these developments has a very negative impact on the basic components of the Sudanese State and led to its disintegration because we have failed to administrate the diversity of the Sudanese identity. The first major negative result was the cession of one-third of the country. This makes it necessary to look seriously at the new Sudan which has lost territory and is facing more serious challenges. We need a new State which recognizes Sudan’s diversity and not a unilateral view, culture, or ideology imposed on all segments of the society without the monopoly of power or wealth by any group.

This is a major project that cannot be designed and implemented by any single party or group. This challenge is no less serious than the challenge of liberation from colonial rule. If the national liberation period needed a wide range of unity and national consensus, we are in more need of this consensus today than before. Any unilateral attempt to design this project will only reproduce the crises and this may be in a stronger magnitude.

We should take into consideration that just a mere national consensus on the project will not be enough for its success because of the major development that occurred on the ground on all aspects, whether on the security front or the political or the economic.

In addition, the conflicts have resulted in a large number of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and migrants. This coincided with an international trend of immigration from the poor South to the rich North.

This demographic trend had a negative impact represented by the loss of a very important part of the national manpower capital of trained and cultured persons. But this at the same time had a positive side because the migrant transfers have supported their families in facing the difficult economic challenges which could have been socially destructive without this support.

So, any new project must take into account all these diverse factors and its main features are quite clear. Some regional groups have reverted to arms to solve their differences with the center. The central control has disintegrated to a large extent and abandoned the modern social components and reverted instead to the old components of tribalism and religious sects at the expense of modern components which people have tried to create vide political activities.

What gives some kind of optimism is that civil society, more than the political parties, has become more aware of this phenomenon. But this gives the challenge that they do not – to a large extent – attract the youth (the main component of the society) and they do not consider it as the main solution. They are influenced by the spread of the flow of information that comes with Information Communication Technology (ICT).

Our youth have the strength but they lack the organization. This is not a Sudanese phenomenon but has been witnessed in many of the Middle Eastern countries. If we look at the results of the Arab Spring, the youth with their sacrifice and determination have toppled the old dictatorships, but because of lack of organization have failed to pick up the fruits of their struggle. This has resulted in a social crisis inside these segments of youth. All these facts have to be faced with patience and determination to build the basis of this new collective work.

The challenges are very serious and Sudan has not witnessed such a challenge since the struggle for independence from colonial rule. This is due to the existence of armed groups and arms are not monopolized by the government. Now the arms are in the free market and available to be purchased and used by all. So, t instruments or repression monopolized by the previous regimes have ended.

The national state worldwide is facing the challenge of globalization which is based on open borders and the weakening of the national state inside its borders for the interest of globalization domination worldwide. So, the national state is facing external challenges, on the one hand, its people are in most cases rebelling against the center, and on the other hand, external pressures represented by globalization aim at reducing its strength. The only way out we have is to rebuild national consensus because there is no balance of strength but a balance of weakness.

This is not limited to Sudan alone, but is the same in the whole area, if we look at Libya, Yemen, Syria, etc.

The only power left is to build internal national power. There is no hope that it can be achieved quickly, but it is the only avenue we have in front of us. We have to start immediately and at the same time, we should not expect quick results.

In other words, there is a strong challenge, but if there is a political will to mobilize the sources of internal strength it can be addressed. This is not clear at present, but there is something growing because societies have an internal amenity, and when it feels the threats this amenity is activated. There is general awareness about this threat, but at the same time, there is desperation which makes them unoptimistic and weakens their political will.

Back to top button