Geneva..the negotiating position – beyond the news – ✍️Mohamed Wadaa
*Government will not travel to Geneva until US administration responds to Sudanese Foreign Ministry demands*
*Adhering to the Jeddah Agreement and implementing it before any further negotiations meets the minimum interests and demands of the Sudanese people*
*The government must support its negotiating position by adjusting the balance of power on the ground*
*The duty of the government is to work towards finding a strong ally in accordance with the basis of common interests while preserving the sovereignty of the country and the independence of its national decision-making process,*
A few days after the US State Department issued the invitation to the Geneva negotiations, US envoy Tom Brillio tried to tone down his arrogance and arrogance, which was mentioned in statements before and after the invitation, by providing justifications for his request to meet with Sudanese leaders at the summit. He had little patience with this position and so returned by threatening that his government would consider other options to confront the party that did not respond to the invitation, Brilio, who has been traveling around Sudan's neighboring countries for about twenty months, wanted to go to Sudan by imposing conditions that affect the country's sovereignty and represent an underestimation of its leaders, and he has perhaps two months left in office. Assuming Kamala Harris wins the election, which seems far-fetched, Trump's victory will throw any agreement into doubt. because the latter canceled the nuclear deal with Iran with a stroke of a pen in the face of opposition from his European partners, and his victory will upset the balance of power in Europe and in the Russo-Ukrainian war and put the region in a negative situation. The Arab world is facing new options, and yet the American envoy knows that he is not in a position to dictate its terms.
The Government of Sudan responded to the Government of the United States regarding the call to hold negotiations in Geneva to achieve a ceasefire, welcoming all sincere efforts to end the war launched by the terrorist rebel militia Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo against the Sudanese people, and reiterating its willingness to engage in negotiations to end the occupation of cities, villages and residences by the terrorist rebel militias, public and private facilities, lifting the siege of cities and opening roads for humanitarian aid. his response that any negotiations before the implementation of the Jeddah Declaration, which stipulates a complete withdrawal and stopping the expansion, will not be acceptable to the Sudanese people, who are subjected to displacement, killings, rapes, ethnic cleansing and looting of their property, and he drew attention to the fact that one party attacks cities, villages and civilians on a daily basis and that instead of opening new platforms, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs demanded that the rebels and mercenaries be forced to stop their ongoing aggression against cities and villages and lift the siege of cities. , and open the roads, by imposing sanctions that deter them and their supporters, because the parties behind the initiative are the same as those in the Jeddah platform and the topics are the same as those agreed. The response indicated the need for prior consultation with. the Sudanese government regarding the form and agenda of any negotiations and the parties participating or attending them, stressing that the Jeddah Platform and the agreement reached therein constitute the basis. The Sudanese government requested in its response to hold a meeting with. The United States government must pave the way for peace negotiations to achieve the benefits expected by the Sudanese people,
Thus, the government determined its negotiating position on Geneva, starting with the importance of prior consultation with America, the initiator, on the form and agenda of the negotiations and the parties participating or attending them, while emphasizing the implementation of the Jeddah Agreement and considering it as the basis for the negotiations, what the Sudanese people, who have suffered, expect from the fire of this aggression, and that the government will not be a party to an agreement that does not meet the interests and aspirations of the country. people of Sudan,
First, the government is expected not to go to Geneva unless the US administration responds to the demands of the Sudanese Foreign Ministry in a way that prepares the climate for serious negotiations, especially regarding adherence to the Jeddah agreement and its implementation. The government cannot conclude any agreement that would not allow citizens to return to their homes, recover their property, and take retaliatory measures against murderers, thieves, and criminals.
Second: The government may go to Geneva after receiving a clear response to the demands of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and be surprised in Geneva with something other than what was agreed and try to impose a fait accompli policy. Thus, the government delegation will have no other choice but to withdraw, no matter how much pressure is put on it.
Third: That the US administration respond clearly to the demands of the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in a way that allows the environment to be prepared for serious and real negotiations.
Fourth: That the Geneva negotiations be postponed or cancelled with or without a return to Jeddah.
Knowing that the American urgency to conduct these negotiations is dictated by electoral necessities and strategic interests, the reality is that the best that the Sudanese government expects in terms of its legitimate demands is faced with real difficulties, perhaps the first of which is the situation on the ground. The government must therefore support its negotiating position by adjusting the balance of forces on the ground, and confirm its ability to thwart regional ambitions, to deter the militia, to defeat it and push it back, and to invest in a strong international polarization to win a strong ally on the basis of common interests and to preserve the country's sovereignty and the independence of its national decision. If the government does not do this, Geneva will not be it. It is only a step on the road to concessions that will not find any acceptance on the part of the Sudanese people, and it would be good if it did not go there. However, if the UAE is present and in whatever capacity, then the right decision is for the government not to go to Geneva at all.
August 4, 2024 AD
