Published in the Jerusalem Post, 29 August 2023 
A vicious power struggle within Sudan’s military leadership has led to a nationwide civil conflict and a huge humanitarian problem. “The situation,” UN agencies declared on August 16, “is spiraling out of control.”
Living conditions within
Sudan have deteriorated to such an extent that, according to the UN, since
April more than a million people have fled to neighboring countries. Chad,
South Sudan, Egypt and Ethiopia are only four of the adjacent states which have
each accepted tens of thousands of refugees. The International Organization for
Migration (IOM) said on August 16 that
the fighting has also displaced more than 3.4 million people inside the country.
There is an acute lack of food, fuel,
water, medicine, and electricity.
Following weeks of tension,
fighting broke out on April 15 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the
paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
The direct trigger was an incident on April 12. On that day, the RSF
dispatched 100 armed vehicles equipped with anti-aircraft guns and other
weapons to Merowe Air Base in northern Sudan.
They claimed to have received "information that the Egyptian Air
Force was sending fighter jets to the base to attack the RSF.” The result was a standoff with the SAF, the
nation’s armed forces, in the city of Merowe, and on the 15th the two militias
clashed in the capital, Khartoum.
Nothing is more bitter
than the falling out of old comrades. The two protagonists in the power
struggle are Army General Abdel Fattah
al-Burhan, head of the SAF, and his deputy in the military command but also leader
of the RSF, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, commonly known as Hemedti, They were once close allies.
In April 2019, the
democratic revolution in Sudan led to the collapse of the 30-year-long regime of
Omar al-Bashir. In the transitional democratic
government that followed, Burhan became head of the ruling Sovereignty Council,
representing the military arm in the country's civilian-military collaborative
administration. He was powerful but, as
he saw it, not powerful enough.
Burhan’s role, which was
perfectly legitimate, was embedded in the power-sharing agreement of August
2019 between the military and the civilian element within Sudan, known as the
Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC), a loose coalition of civilian groups. Under that agreement the powers
concerned pledged themselves to move the country in an orderly fashion toward
democracy, and to parliamentary elections in 2023.
However, popular feeling
had grown increasingly impatient with the obvious lack of progress toward any
form of democracy, and with the administration’s failure to deal with the
country’s severe economic problems. On
October 22, 2021 national frustration erupted in a mass protest in the capital,
Khartoum, in support of civilian rule.
Together Burhan and Dagalo orchestrated a military coup and took over control of the country. Three days later Burhan dissolved the country's civilian cabinet, arrested prime minister Abdalla Hamdok and other leading figures, and declared that the country was under military governance.
The grab for power did
not last long. Widespread opposition
ranging from the Arab League to the US Secretary of State was too great. Burhan pulled back, reinstated Hamdok and pledged
to “maintain the path of the democratic transition.”
It was not long before Burhan
was challenged by his deputy in the Council of Generals, Dagalo. Dagalo, who had spent some 20 years in the
RSF, now headed the paramilitary force. He
had built it up into a powerful militia that had intervened in conflicts in
Yemen and Libya. The RSF has been
accused of human rights abuses, including the massacre of more than 120
protesters in June 2019. Such a strong force outside the army was seen as a
source of instability in the country, and Burhan’s plan to take over control of
the RSF by merging it with the nation’s formal armed services was the main bone
of contention between the two erstwhile colleagues.
Reports indicate that
the fighting has reduced Khartoum to an urban battlefield. Across the city RSF
forces have commandeered homes and turned them into operational bases. The
army, in turn, has been firing artillery on residential areas from both the air
and ground.
“The remains of many of
those killed have not been collected, identified or buried,” the UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights has said.
What do the two
protagonists say they want? Dagalo has
said, in a series of tweets, that he and the RSF are "fighting for the
people of Sudan to ensure the democratic progress for which they have so long
yearned". Given the brutal track
record of the RSF, many find this message hard to believe. Burhan has said he supports the idea of
returning to civilian rule, but that he will hand over power only to an elected
government. It is likely that both are
also mesmerized by the lure of power, and the wealth and influence that go with
it.
Meanwhile the UK, US and
EU have all called for a ceasefire and talks to resolve the crisis.
Sudan, of course, is nominally one of Israel’s new Arab partners under the Abraham Accords. Where does this chaotic state of affairs leave its normalization deal with Israel?
It was in February 2020 that Israel’s then-prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, met Burhan, head of Sudan’s Sovereignty Council, in Uganda, where they agreed to normalize the ties between the two countries.
An initial agreement on October 23, 2020 saw Sudan removed from the US government list of countries promoting terrorism, and on January 6, 2021 in a quiet ceremony in Khartoum, Sudan formally signed up to the Abraham Accords.
Just how substantive is
the Israel-Sudan normalization deal? The then military leadership under Burhan
that concluded the deal with Israel was acting perfectly legitimately on behalf
of the state of Sudan. Whatever the outcome of the conflict between
Burhan and Dagalo, Sudan is a nation in transition, on a rocky road to
parliamentary elections intended to usher in full democratic civilian
rule. Once the conflict is brought to an end, parliamentary
elections held and civilian rule restored, a democratic government could either
endorse or renounce the nation’s membership of the Abraham Accords.
Which way the chips will
eventually fall is anybody’s guess.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-756615
No comments:
Post a Comment