Sudan’s Troubled Transition: Military vs. Civilians

Desk

[post-views]

For a while, Sudan was on the cusp of a new era of democracy, but that dream has quickly been crushed by the bickering of military generals. The third largest nation in Africa had hoped for a smooth transition to civilian rule after Gen Omar al-Bashir’s ousting four years ago, but that prospect has been marred by infighting between army chiefs. The result is that Khartoum is now witnessing a level of violence not seen since the colonial era.

The current dispute between the generals hinges on how long it should take to incorporate the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) into the regular armed forces. The RSF is a direct descendant of the Janjaweed militia that terrorized Darfur in the early 2000s. Army chief Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan wants the integration to take just two years, while his rival, Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (aka Hemedti), prefers a ten-year process. Hemedti, who is disliked by the Khartoum elite, wants to hold onto his power base for as long as possible.

Instead of a clear path to civilian rule, the country is now facing open warfare on its streets. Many diplomats, including most Western envoys, have fled the capital. The US has even deployed special forces, including the SEAL Team 6 that eliminated Osama bin Laden, to the outskirts of Abbottabad. It’s a clear sign that the situation in Sudan is deteriorating rapidly, with no clear end in sight.

The current situation in Sudan serves as a stark reminder of the military’s political ineptitude.

It’s worth noting that Sudan has a history of dabbling in socialism, communism, and political Islam. Jaafar Nimeiri, who led a military coup in 1969, posed as a socialist who later turned to Islamism, imposing Sharia law two years before his ouster in 1985.

Today, the post-Cold War scramble for Africa has taken on a different form. The Great Game has extended beyond European powers, with Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE now part of the mix, and Russia playing a forceful role. The US and UN have been courting both of the key generals who cooperated in 2019 and 2021 but are now at loggerheads.

Acquire our monthly English and Urdu magazine promptly by accessing the Daraz App hyperlink!

https://www.daraz.pk/shop/3lyw0kmd

Army chief Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Egypt’s Abdel Fattah al-Sisi were contemporaries in military school, and Cairo backs the Sudanese military. The Saudis are inclined in the same direction, but hedging their bets. So are the Russians, even though the infamous Wagner Group — modelled on the American mercenary group Blackwater — has collaborated with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in the recent past.

The RSF is a direct descendant of the Janjaweed militia that wreaked havoc in Darfur in the early 2000s. The current dispute is over how long it should take for the RSF to be incorporated into the regular armed forces. Burhan wants the process to take two years, while his rival, Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, aka Hemedti, would prefer to extend the process for a decade.

As a result, open warfare has erupted on the streets of Khartoum, with most Western and many other diplomats fleeing the capital. The US has deployed special forces, including SEAL Team 6, which was responsible for sealing Osama bin Laden’s fate on the outskirts of Abbottabad.

The Sudanese people have suffered greatly from the clashes in Khartoum and elsewhere. They are eager to be rid of both warring factions, whose vested interests do not coincide with popular aspirations. However, the civilian population is likely to suffer as the generals fight to the finish at their expense and the interests of Sudan as a nation.

Sudan’s colonial legacy cannot be entirely separated from its fraught post-colonial experience, and a transition to a civilian-led democracy seems to be a distant dream at the moment. The fate of Sudan could serve as a cautionary tale for other post-colonial nations that have relied too heavily on their military forces to establish a sustainable polity.

The situation in Sudan is a sad reflection of the military’s political incompetence. Men in uniform and the captured institutions that sing from the same song sheet have a notorious track record of failing to establish a sustainable polity. It remains to be seen what the future holds for Sudan, but it is clear that a transition to a civilian-led democracy will require significant effort and cooperation from all parties involved.

The events unfolding in Sudan reflect the military’s political incompetence, and the situation seems unlikely to improve any time soon. The country’s history and current geopolitical climate suggest that there is no easy way out, and the civilian population continues to suffer as the military factions fight for power and influence. However, the situation in Sudan can serve as a cautionary tale for other post-colonial nations that have relied too heavily on their military forces to establish a sustainable polity. It is a reminder that military men are not always suited to nation-building and that the civilian population must be considered and included in any efforts to establish a functioning democracy.