The army's victories confuse the political calculations of the parties – The face of truth – ✍️ Ibrahim Shaqlawi
In this article we try to follow the evolution of the positions of political parties with regard to what is happening in Sudan, taking into account two important facts: the first: the repeated violations of the rapid support militia in the Sudanese State of Al-Jazeera, and the second. : the victories of the Sudanese army on several axes of combat.
The Civil Forces Coordination (Taqaddam) issued an exceptional statement in which it clearly condemned the Rapid Support Militia, the first of its kind with such severity since the outbreak of war in Sudan in mid-April last year , during which violations against civilians intensified in several Sudanese states, particularly in villages in Gezira State.
The coordination statement refers to developments in the east of the island and holds the militia responsible for widespread violations in the towns of Rifa'a, Tamboul and Al-Hilaliyah, and many villages in the east of the island have been submitted. massive intimidation operations, some of which amounted to deprivation of the right to life by shooting defenseless civilians, in addition to widespread looting and pillaging operations that included major markets in many areas of the east and the north of the island, which exacerbated the humanitarian situation and led to a mass exodus from the region.
The militia's “progress” required adherence to the Jeddah Agreement on Security and Humanitarian Arrangements signed on May 11, 2023 and respect for international law aimed at protecting civilians. What is striking about this statement is that “Taqaddum” spoke of the need for the militia's commitment to the Jeddah agreement and did not mention the partnership document it signed with the militia leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, in Addis Ababa last January. , which Taqaddum was quick to move towards, believing it would guarantee a stable political partnership after the war. She is accused of having started it, because her hasty reading – or perhaps that of the putschist – believed that the control of the country by the militias had become. a question of time.
Therefore, the document expresses agreement to establish civil authorities, protect civilians and open safe routes of movement. In it, the militia commits to several commitments, including opening safe corridors for humanitarian aid to reach areas under its control and creating conditions for citizens. to return home to war-affected areas, including the island mandate which is being violated these days. However, ten months after this document, the situation continues to deteriorate and become more complex and none of its provisions have been implemented.
Observers consider that the Addis Ababa Declaration document constituted a major political and moral burden for the coordination of “Progress”, and even almost undermined its unity, because it did not advance the trends of the peace nor committed the militias to respect the commitments they had made to protect civilians or to allow the entry of humanitarian aid, or even to create conditions for the return of citizens as stipulated in the document, the violations have multiplied and rates of forced displacement have doubled.
This leads us to ask an important question: if the “Taqaddum” coordination, led by Abdullah Hamdok, has its own decision and is not subject to the international or regional will controlling the war, then why do we reconsider does she not know the feasibility of her project? partnership with the Rapid Support Militia after abandoning its commitment to the document? Why does she refer in her statement at that time to the need for militias to adhere to the Jeddah agreement to protect civilians, which is an important agreement according to experts and is considered a gateway to end the war, even if the militias refuse to comply in the first place? On the other hand, “Taqaddam” was not enthusiastic about its implementation, but rather expressed reservations about it for many reasons, including the fact that it did not refer to a political process. This is what Taqaddam continued to fear, even after the Cairo Conference of the Parties and the African Union adopted a separate political process based on Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue within the country.
It would therefore have been more advantageous for Taqaddam to reconsider an agreement to which it is a party, rather than one on which it maintains reservations, given that it provides for the elimination of militias through demobilization and reintegration mechanisms in accordance with to standards. of the Sudanese army, and does not speak of a political process. This leads us to say: that the term “progress” in his statement on the Jeddah agreement may indicate the existence of agreements with regional or international parties working to close the file of the militias. in the interest of peace and so that its position appears coherent with that of the other parties.
There is talk of meetings being held these days in Cairo between Sudanese political parties with the aim of finding an approach to stopping the war and moving on to the next day. These efforts can be supported by consistent statements against the Rapid Support Militia issued by a number of Sudanese political parties and armed struggle movements, in which they denounced the events in Gezira State, including the Communist Party , the Broader Islamic Movement, the Umma Party. led by Mubarak al-Fadil, the National Umma Party and the democratic and armed struggle movements of the Federal Party; All condemned the violations carried out by the Rapid Support Militia and the massacres it committed in the villages of Al-Jazeera State.
Accordingly, it can be said that the clear condemnation of the parties, which for the first time experienced a consensus on the violations committed by the Rapid Support Militia, represents an important change in the political position of the parties and can contribute to the strengthening of the national situation. dialogue and achieve peace and stability in the country.
We are therefore faced with new data that could give rise to a strategic approach in the unity of opinion that unanimously condemns Rapid Support, and this approach could constitute a new title in the political arena in the coming days, given the steps accelerated as the army moves toward liberating cities and regaining control, which has confused the parties' calculations regarding political support for the militia. Therefore, the truth remains in the importance of national alignment to break the stalemate of war, away from zero-sum conflicts between the parties. We also hope for decisive victories by the army that will bring about a just peace for the Sudanese and restore security and tranquility.
May you always be well.
Saturday October 26, 2024 AD. (email protected)
