Sudanese relations -Americans .. (fixed and variable) ✍️ d. Al -rasheed Muhammad Ibrahim
* Prepare *
Relations between Sudan and America have remained in a swaying state on the succession of political systems and national governments, which led some to compare them to the states that are defective during the US elections during the race to the White House between the dominant and monopolized parties of the number of times for the American elections, if they were presidents of the White House or the Parliamentarian towards the Congress, the two representatives.
It may seem that the case of American relations with Sudan is more stable and perhaps a recovery with the Republicans and the opposite in the implementation of successive democratic departments, according to the criterion of imposing economic sanctions and placing the name of Sudan on the list of countries sponsoring terrorism, as well as the military strike of Sudan with cruise missiles and Tomawak, of the madness of Sudan.
It should be noted that the state of bilateral relations is linked to a measurement and to the Islands of Israeli security, so that the name of Sudan from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism has not requested the dismantling of terrorist cells or Sudanese groups classified as American, but rather a normalization stipulated with Israel, which abandons all charges against the Sudanese state.
In this, the article tries to touch or help answer the central question. * Are we in front of new horizons in Sudanese relations -Americans? *.
* Transfer and change to the American position *.
Now there are transformations in the approach of the abuse of the American administration with the Sudan file and the war conditions, which can be monitored in the following *: *
* Trump’s ambition * to be a man of peace and his aspiration for the International Peace Nobel Prize.
* The declarations of Massad Paul * which express the point of view of the American administration with the desire to cooperate with Sudan in the * terrorism file *.
Failure or failure * Quartet meetings * in Washington, which is the management and re -evaluation of the American side of the roles of the countries which depended in its management of the Sudan file, in particular * the Abu Dhabi * regime and after its direct participation in supporting the ière of American opinion and the American opinion, which lowered the regime has become good material for the Democratic Rival and Republican in the context of the background This constitutional transgression in Hassan is that Congress is a guardian of arms sales and its financing staff of the American taxpayer.
* Militia’s burden is a violation of human rights and war crimes * It has become difficult to perpetrate and does not work with it.
The official Mrika does not have the capacity to share charges with the Abu Dhabi regime.
*Opportunities*
The international political environment is overflowing with conflicts, conflicts and priorities for drying wars. It has become a particular necessity for the Ukrainian Russian issue and its threat to European security and the North Atlantic remains on the scale of current Trump administration. The Alaska meeting supports the peace options on the decision of the confrontation form which exhausted the international economy and European security and the North Atlantic so that NATO has been removed from the service and has not strengthened the act. Much in front of this greater danger in the history of the military alliance after the end of the Second World War, ending in the Cold War, the solution of Warsaw and the transition to the single system according to the structure of the international system, although some consider it a temporary situation.
Not far from the memory of the world * The war of the 12 days between Iran and Israel * which put the whole world on a heating plate which could have extended its fire to light a regional or semi-global war. This event restored the state of the mental storms of war defenders to its normal status (controlling the factory) and developed the level of consciousness of the danger of conflicts and stressed the truth and the importance of peace for the size of the bill and the cost.
* The instructions of the American administration and the American presidential mood * towards Africa, where the strategy is characterized by the support of the rapprochements of stability and contracting in terms of the peace agreement between Rwanda and Kengo. People can differ on the motivations and objectives of American policies and peace, but that does not deny that there is a real and serious movement and that it is its political conditions of construction or imposed by economic needs.
* International competition to Africa * and the contrast and intersection of strategies creates a case similar to supply and economic demand, but with a political brand.
Without working for specific stories of strengths and weaknesses in Sudanese -American relations, but it is not possible to neglect the role of Sudan and its position in the EMA strategy, whether it be American, Israeli, Abrahamic, Russia and Chinese, as well as the reality of the war of dignity and the resulting equations that have shot strategic balance in Africa.
* The presence of alternatives to the Sudanese state * while heading east * towards Russia, China and Turkey, which considerably reduces all American pressure and dictates to Sudan, even if it was done through the United Nations Security Council, which has become a tool for international conflicts to manage the right to criticism.
* People *
Lack of clear resolution of the state of aggression and the regime of Abu Dhabi.
The Israeli lobby and its influence in the American decision – taking and drawing the policies of the region, in particular the Grand Middle East.
The lack of confidence and reliability in the American administration by the institutions and components of the Sudanese State.
Sudanese public opinion has great doubts and concerns about the sincerity of American tendencies towards Sudan.
Acute internal polarization and external pressure in the identity of Sudanese foreign policy relations.
*Conclusion*
Despite the positive indicators, but it seems that time is still early to achieve specific assessments governed by the directions and paths of the functioning of Sudanese-American relations, while recognizing the existence of a new opportunity, political and security cooperation according to the equation of force and interest, in particular in the field of the fight against terrorism, began to train and create its characteristics, in particular from the American side. It’s good but not enough.
I am not sought by the way in which the Sudanese decision taking with the American initiative concerning bilateral relations with Sudan, but if it is estimated that he will expect him to between with two hands, the first holding the African century and the second, and the second rally in the peripherals Al -Awawa, Ozu, Gol la Libya of extremist and terrorists Sahara region, which is the crescent of the largest African crises.
D. Al -rasheed Muhammad Ibrahim
Director of the Center for International Political Relations. Khartoum
