Al-Ahram Weekly | Region | Towards a 'just Sudan'

		Al-Ahram Weekly Online 28 Feb. - 6 March 2002 Issue No.575
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875		Current issue \| Previous issue \| Site map

Towards a 'just Sudan'
Despite setbacks in the peace process, Sudan's fragmented opposition is ready to bury the hatchet, writes Dominic Coldwell after attending a one-day reconciliation meeting in Oxford
The United States has suspended talks with the Sudanese government to end the country's civil war following an attack two weeks ago by the Sudanese air force on a humanitarian relief centre of the World Food Programme (WFP) inside rebel-held territory. The raid on the village of Bieh reportedly left 17 civilians dead after a helicopter gunship lobbed five rockets into the UN compound.
The assault comes only weeks after the ink dried on a joint Swiss and US- brokered agreement to establish a cease-fire between the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) and the central government in the SPLA stronghold of the Nuba Mountains in the south-western province of Kordofan (Al-Ahram Weekly 24-30 January). For the first time ever, international observers were poised to monitor compliance with the truce.
Whether last week's air strike signals the end of peace negotiations remains to be seen. The Sudanese opposition, however, is not pessimistic. "The potential for peace negotiations in Sudan is very promising," beamed Sadiq Al- Mahdi, the country's former prime minister and head of the Umma Party, after meeting Peter Nyok Kok, a legal adviser to the SPLA, at a recent one-day conference in Oxford. Since all other initiatives are deadlocked, the "American input" represents a "window of opportunity" that "all Sudanese parties welcome," Al-Mahdi said.
If negotiations resume, the US initiative might turn out to be much more than just a narrow opening. Despite continued restrictions, "the regime now tolerates a margin of freedom... in student elected unions and in the press," Al-Mahdi noted, and "has accepted the need for constitutional and legal reform in theory." Not only had Khartoum "normalised regional relations," but it had also engaged in "a critical dialogue" with Europe, and, more importantly, cooperated with the US in its fight against terrorism, he added.
Meanwhile, war weariness has already spread dissension in the ranks of the rebels. Arab and southern tribes rubbing shoulders in disputed areas signed cease-fire agreements in Wunjok and Marial in June 2000. In January 2001, the Comboni missionaries denounced the SPLA's continuation of war "as a manifestation of greed and power- seeking," Al-Mahdi noted. Efforts by the New Sudan Council of Churches to promote peace at a conference in Kenya last June also showed how civil society may stand up "to the SPLA/M [Sudan People's Liberation Movement, the SPLA political wing] leadership," Al-Mahdi said.
If Al-Mahdi expects differences inside the Christian camp to marginalise hard-liners, the same holds true for the north. "Public opinion is now fully mobilised for a just peace and democratisation," he contended. Even if "short-sighted" parties in the regime do not want a peace agreement, the government would "suffer broad national isolation" if it turned against peace, Al- Mahdi said. "Public opinion in this country is fed up with war."
Given such sentiments, Sudan's fragmented opposition might soon sing from the same sheet. Kok ostensibly thanked Al-Mahdi "for the role he played in leading northern public opinion to come to terms with [granting the south the right to] self-determination," after the central government agreed in principle to a future referendum by signing the Declaration of Principles (DOP) sponsored by the Inter- governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in 1997.
Kok's shoulder-patting is significant in light of the bitter recriminations that accompanied the withdrawal of the Umma Party in March 2000 from the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), the umbrella organisation for Sudan's opposition parties based in the Eritrean capital Asmara which includes the SPLM. Al-Mahdi's departure followed disagreement over the Umma Party's decision to engage in dialogue with the regime before any tangible progress toward democratisation transpired. At the time, SPLA leader John Garang alleged that Al-Mahdi had leaked sensitive intelligence on the NDA's military strategy in eastern Sudan to the government in the wake of his party's withdrawal from the NDA's joint military command .
None of this seemed to matter any more in Oxford. Kok's approval of Al- Mahdi partly reflects recognition that the Umma remains the country's most viable opposition party with a considerable following in western Sudan. Al- Mahdi is likely to remain a force to be reckoned with in any democratic government that may succeed Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir.
More importantly, Washington's traditional support for the south seems to be wavering after the SPLM stunned observers by allying with Khartoum's former Islamist ideologue Hassan Al- Turabi in March 2001. Turabi has been widely blamed for sheltering Saudi dissident Osama Bin Laden in 1995. A report released by an independent think- tank in Washington that same month also suggested that increased oil production had tipped the scales of the fighting in favour of the Sudanese government.
The sea change by an oil-conscious Bush administration, however, may be more of a curse than a blessing. Already there are signs that the newly found entente of Sudan's opposition may unravel. While both sides have agreed to respect the outcome of a future referendum on southern self- determination, Al-Mahdi favours "self-determination with priority for unity" without yet specifying whether there would be a referendum in the south only or in the entire country -- an option that would diminish southern prospects for achieving independence.
By contrast, Kok is adamant that unity between the north and the south would have to be voluntary. The SPLA, therefore, expects a referendum to be conducted in the south alone. American pressure may well confirm southern fears that Washington is selling the Christians' political future down the river. If the Americans "think their role as fighters against international terrorism allows them to impose a Pax Americana, they are terribly mistaken," he said.
"Fine, there is US pressure," Kok conceded. "You can take a horse to the river, but you can't force it to drink. You can't force the south to accept unity. I will not accept it."
"The irony of the situation in the Sudan is that there is little that people disagree on," Kok maintained. The government has conceded self- determination in principle. However, for the south "the priority is not unity but justice... A just Sudan would take care of unity," Kok said.

Recommend this page

© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved

Send a letter to the Editor

ARCHIVES
Letter from the Editor
Editorial Board
Subscription
Advertise!

WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly
Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time
weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg

Al-Ahram Organisation