The republican palace who has the decision to modify? – The face of the truth – ✍️ Ibrahim Shaqlawi
The Sudanese army approaching the republican recovery of the palace at the center of Khartoum, which has been controlled by the rapid support militia since the start of the war in the midst of April 2023, the army forces have moved Towards several axes after classifying a certain number of military sites and dispersed the seat on leadership and signal weapon. The event becomes greater than a simple military victory, because its field dimensions go beyond the rearrangement of power in Sudan. The Republican Palace as a sovereign symbol was not only a strategic location. While the army approaches its total control over it, the question arises on the political and military repercussions of this evolution, is it a turning point in state management or is it a prelude to a new Conflict on power at the post-war stadium? In this article, we discuss a number of ideas on the subject, given anyone who has the decision to release the palace is the policy or military capacities.
In light of this complex scene, it is not possible to face the release of the palace as a simple military station of war stations, but rather an important step during Sudan which reflects deeper transformations in the balance of power between the military establishment and interactions of political parties. The release of the palace also imposes on the army and the political forces to make decisive decisions on the management of the next step, which will determine the nature of the Sudanese state the next day.
Since its creation in the 19th century during Turkish-Egyptian domination, the Republican Palace has been one of the most important symbols of political power in Sudan. Initially, there was the seat of the public sovereign during British colonialism, but after independence in 1956, he turned to the political heart of the Sudanese State, where he witnessed the declaration of independence and the succession of presidents. He played a central role in the formation of the political scene, because it was the scene of major events, military kicks in transition periods and tried to build the Sudanese state. The symbolism of the palace was not limited to being the seat of the government, but always reflected the balance of powers within the State, so that all those who controlled it were considered as the owner of political legitimacy, that this either in periods of military or democratic regime. Thus, the release of the palace today is not only a restoration of a strategic location, but rather a restoration of national legitimacy.
The recent military movements of the army reveal a clear strategy aimed at restoring control of the sovereign centers of the country, not only to ensure victory in the field, but also to reinstall the State as an institution capable of imposing its prestige. However, this progress is inseparable from deeper challenges linked to the relegating of the political scene after the war, in particular in the light of the contrast of visions between the military component and the political parties on the future of power.
Consequently, the idea can be discussed according to three scenarios, the first is to reshape the role of the army within the political system since the start of the war, the Sudanese army has become a national institution confronted with a Existential challenge before the state dismantling project. With the restoration of control, the military establishment will be resolved its position on its future role. This question is imposed by previous experiences, because most Sudanese consider that peace and restoration of security are at the top of priorities, so that they do not care about the continuous rule of the country's army and From the creation of security, with the help of a government of non -partisan national skills until the creation of legislative elections which allow the parties to move to the country towards the civil regime.
In this, the experience of Marshal Swar Al -Dahab remains a dialect, because it is considered one of the most successful experiences of the transfer of power to civilians, because it received authority in the name of the army in The uprising of April 1985, as the highest leader, and coordinated with the leaders of parties and unions, presented it by elections in 1986.
The second is the equation of power between military and political factions, so that the restoration of the presidential palace raises a vital question about the actors who will appear in the new scene. The army is not alone in the equation, because armed groups supporting it can require a share of power. How will these forces be treated? Will it be integrated into the state institution, or will a new influence crisis be established which can reproduce instability? Country experiences such as Iraq and Libya have shown that the absence of a clear vision of the post-war management stage leads to the disintegration of power, while the victorious factions turn into competing forces centers that hinder the state construction process. Sudan is not far from this scenario if it is not specified transitional arrangements. However, according to declarations of forces supporting the army, such as the Islamic tendency and the peace movements of Juba, all agree, according to the declarations issued by their supreme leaders to proceed according to the transitional arrangements managed by the army Until the elections, which can be agreed by joint mechanisms.
The third, which is the weakest, is that certain political forces combined with rebellion are tempted, using foreigners to put pressure to redefine political legitimacy and hinder all the political arrangements which result from it, which restore the country On the square of the crisis before the war. We must keep in mind that certain regional and international powers have relied on the rapid support militia and their local supporters as a tool for relegating the political scene in Sudan, thanks to a project to dismantle central authority and to redistribute the influence. But the release of the potential palace and previous military victories; This is an indication of the collapse of this project, which will push these forces to restore their calculations or perhaps a grace, that is to say a national transition between national political forces and the army.
While the balance of powers in Sudan has changed, the Islamist flow has become a major actor, based on his absolute support for the army and his interaction with popular mood. This transformation imposes a new reality on Sudanese foreign policy, because Khartoum will be faced with the need to reformulate his relations with the more pragmatic international community, because Sudan post-war will not be an extension of its predecessor, but will rather have difficult options Who can range from the construction of new alliances or adaptation to international trends in the region, in particular in the light of the new American administration policy which tends to reduce tensions and settle wars.
Consequently, engineering of the political scene after the release of the Republican Palace requires a vision which transcends the logic of military or political victory to a national project including all the inhabitants of Sudan which re-drads the relationship between power and 'State, and establishes legitimacy based on national stability and consensus. Consequently, it is important to transform this event into an establishment of a stable and strong state, so that this victory is transformed into the construction of a coherent state, far from zero conflicts, so that we do not reproduce the previous crises which have introduced the country into the country into war, and that is the truth.
You are fine and well
Tuesday February 4, 2025 AD. (Protected by e-mail)
