Political forces…differences and dialogues – beyond current events – ✍️ Muhammad Wadaa
Growing rate of resignations and divisions within political forces*
*The position on the war was a common denominator in all the differences and disputes of the political forces*
*The majority of divisions occurred on the “No to War” front, inside and outside of progress*
*Outside Taqaddam and within the Communist Party, deep differences emerged which were addressed through statements and counter-statements*
*Sudanese political forces are required to conduct internal dialogue to determine a position on the war that expresses party institutions*
War eliminated (the green and the dry), a common expression to summarize the destruction, sabotage, murder, displacement of citizens, pillage and plunder of their property, and occupation of their homes, and with the enormous changes in the way of life of the Sudanese and their demonstration of immense patience and courage to face what happened, but the consideration of the Sudanese political forces for the war and its disastrous effects has been minimal, and some of these forces failed. showing some respect for the feelings and sorrows of the Sudanese people under faded banners such as (No to War), without making any tangible contribution to alleviating the scourge of war, at least in theory, it is clear that some of them. The leaders of the political forces have become like cows and are experiencing a crisis in their decision-making method. They were unable to clearly define their position on the violations and crimes committed by the Rapid Support Militia against civilians and against state installations. And civilian property under the pretext that the army also committed violations, and therefore the vision remained incomplete regarding the impact of this war on the structure of the Sudanese state and its future, as well as on societal formations and opportunities for peaceful coexistence and restoration. of the social fabric, and perhaps some leaders were kidnapped and the decisions of party institutions were exported. And act alone,
Deep disagreements and disagreements have hit the Sudanese political forces since the start of the war on April 15, 2023. Splits, resignations and conflicts hidden at the beginning and limited by the means of management of the non-existent internal dialogue, then they appeared in the open. day. The position on the war was a common denominator in all these differences. The leaders believe that this war represents an existential challenge to the survival of the Sudanese state and believe that the duty of political forces is to stand with the situation. survival of state institutions and to support the Sudanese army in fulfilling its constitutional duty to protect the country and its people. Still other leaders (claim) that the war is between (two generals), and he remains neutral and brandishes the slogan (No to). war), while its hidden position is to stand with the militias, and these leaders justify their position that the war is aimed at implementing the framework agreement and restoring democratic transformation, and it is to note that most of these internal divisions occurred On the “No to War” front, and more particularly in the forces which place themselves under the banner of progress, the Sudanese Congress was divided and the leaders who founded the National Current Party resigned and the National Current Party left it. The country is trying to cling to the legitimacy of institutions and resist warning signs of division. With time limited, the Politburo meeting could be the last opportunity to avoid division.
Outside of Taqaddam and within the Communist Party, deep differences emerged which were addressed through declarations and counter-statements, as happened in the declaration of the Democratic Front (University of Khartoum), in resignations public statements of historical leaders and in the question of the position on the war was the main reason for the differences that arose. She was treated coldly, portraying outsiders as justifying their failure to carry out the fight with these resignations.
The war created exceptional conditions for the political forces, and the question of the position on the war constituted the greatest pressure on the way of making the decision or on the political position, and cast a shadow on the ability of these forces to read the results of the war. strategic warfare, so they became preoccupied and immersed in the details of the consequences of war. Sudanese political forces are required to manage an internal dialogue to determine a position on the war that reflects party institutions, not a position led by certain leaders. linked to a personal agenda, or dependent on external commitments.
We say that the Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue and the holding of the Constitutional Conference represent a historic opportunity for the political forces not only to resolve the problems and complexities of the political process, but also to resolve the internal differences within these forces themselves. same.
October 8, 2024 AD
*Increasing rate of resignations and divisions within political forces*
*The position on the war was a common denominator in all the differences and disputes of the political forces*
*The majority of divisions occurred on the “No to War” front, inside and outside of progress*
*Outside Taqaddam and within the Communist Party, deep differences emerged which were addressed through statements and counter-statements*
*Sudanese political forces are required to conduct internal dialogue to determine a position on the war that expresses party institutions*
War eliminated (the green and the dry), a common expression to summarize the destruction, sabotage, murder, displacement of citizens, pillage and plunder of their property, and occupation of their homes, and with the enormous changes in the way of life of the Sudanese and their demonstration of immense patience and courage to face what happened, but the consideration of the Sudanese political forces for the war and its disastrous effects has been minimal, and some of these forces failed. showing some respect for the feelings and sorrows of the Sudanese people under faded banners such as (No to War), without making any tangible contribution to alleviating the scourge of war, at least in theory, it is clear that some of them. The leaders of the political forces have become like cows and are experiencing a crisis in their decision-making method. They were unable to clearly define their position on the violations and crimes committed by the Rapid Support Militia against civilians and against state installations. And civilian property under the pretext that the army also committed violations, and therefore the vision remained incomplete regarding the impact of this war on the structure of the Sudanese state and its future, as well as on societal formations and opportunities for peaceful coexistence and restoration. of the social fabric, and perhaps some leaders were kidnapped and the decisions of party institutions were exported. And act alone,
Deep disagreements and disagreements have hit the Sudanese political forces since the start of the war on April 15, 2023. Splits, resignations and conflicts hidden at the beginning and limited by the means of management of the non-existent internal dialogue, then they appeared in the open. day. The position on the war was a common denominator in all these differences. The leaders believe that this war represents an existential challenge to the survival of the Sudanese state and believe that the duty of political forces is to stand with the situation. survival of state institutions and to support the Sudanese army in fulfilling its constitutional duty to protect the country and its people. Still other leaders (claim) that the war is between (two generals), and he remains neutral and brandishes the slogan (No to). war), while its hidden position is to stand with the militias, and these leaders justify their position that the war is aimed at implementing the framework agreement and restoring democratic transformation, and it is to note that most of these internal divisions occurred On the “No to war” front, and more particularly in the forces which place themselves under the banner of progress, the Sudanese Congress was divided and the leaders who founded the National Current Party resigned and the National Current Party left it. The country is trying to cling to the legitimacy of institutions and resist warning signs of division. With time limited, the Politburo meeting could be the last opportunity to avoid division.
Outside of Taqaddam and within the Communist Party, deep differences emerged which were addressed through declarations and counter-statements, as happened in the declaration of the Democratic Front (University of Khartoum), in resignations public statements of historical leaders and in the question of the position on the war was the main reason for the differences that arose. She was treated coldly, portraying outsiders as justifying their failure to carry out the fight with these resignations.
The war created exceptional conditions for the political forces, and the question of the position on the war constituted the greatest pressure on the way of making the decision or on the political position, and cast a shadow on the ability of these forces to read the results of the war. strategic warfare, so they became preoccupied and immersed in the details of the consequences of war. Sudanese political forces are required to manage an internal dialogue to determine a position on the war that reflects party institutions, not a position led by certain leaders. linked to a personal agenda, or dependent on external commitments.
We say that the Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue and the holding of the Constitutional Conference represent a historic opportunity for the political forces not only to resolve the problems and complexities of the political process, but also to resolve the internal differences within these forces themselves. same.
October 8, 2024 AD
