|
|
Alberto M. Fernandez, vice president of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), spoke to a December 9th Middle East Forum Webinar (video) about the current situation in Sudan and its implications for the U.S. and the West.
Fernandez noted that since it gained its independence in 1956, Sudan, one of the largest countries in Africa and the Arab world with a population of forty million, has been racked by civil wars and military coups every few years. Although a military coup in 1969 overthrew a democratically elected government and brought Islamists to power, Fernandez said that Sudan, “unlike other countries in the Arab world,” has a long history of democratic rule. Comprehensive peace accords in 2005 brought some stability to the country and eventually led to an independent South Sudan.
In 2019, hundreds of thousands of Sudanese took to the streets to protest the dictatorship of the Islamist, Omar Bashir, who “promoted [an] Islamist revolution throughout Africa” and welcomed bin Laden and al Qaeda into Sudan. Despite his anti-Americanism, Bashir feared U.S. power. His placement on a terrorism list and the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the country prevented him from conducting international business and caused him to later “pragmatically [work] with the Americans.” The protesting populace, aided by the military, ousted Bashir’s almost thirty-year-long regime. In the years immediately following the 2019 coup, the military built a vast complex of economic, commercial, and military holdings, and the generals who overthrew Bashir were unwilling to give up their power.
A temporary civilian component of the Sudanese government, formed with the assistance of the international community, was designed to lead the new government towards agreed-upon special elections. Headed by an international civil servant, Abdalla Hamdok, Sudan made some progress toward democratic reforms. Hamdok instituted freedom of the press and freedom of religion and rid Sudan of blasphemy and apostasy laws. He even met with the family of the late Islamic Sudanese thinker, Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, who had been executed as a heretic by a pro-American Sudanese government in 1985. Taha, who had preached a tolerant, humanistic Islam, had become a “martyr of freedom of expression and religious freedom in Sudan.”
However, in 2021, the military launched another coup which overthrew the temporary civilian body of the Sudanese government. Fernandez said that Sudan is now in a “dire situation” in that the country is being run by a divided military instead of a government. The two factions within the armed forces are the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), with General Mohan as its acting head of state, and the “rapid support services” led by General Dagalo, aka Hemetti. In addition to the two divided authoritarian military elements, “lurking in the background” are Bashir’s Islamists itching to return to power.
The political climate in Sudan since 2021 has hence been one of “great uncertainty,” Fernandez said. He noted also conflicting reports of a split in the army between those “favoring” and those “distancing themselves” from the Islamists. The Sudanese people have peacefully demonstrated against the military dictatorship, and thousands have been arrested, injured, or killed by the security forces. The international community has applied pressure on the military regime to craft yet another “complex” framework agreement to reestablish a democratic civilian process that would lead to elections in two years.
In the framework of the Trump Administration’s Abraham Accords, Sudan was removed from the terrorism list and had its banking economic profile normalized, thereby giving it access to the World Bank and international loans. Trump also demanded that Sudan agree to pay $400 million in reparations to the victims of the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa. Those attacks were “planned and carried out from Sudan” by al Qaeda.
Fernandez said that “Sudanese history is littered with all kinds of peace accords, political agreements, and arrangements that have been subverted, usually by the military.” Because of Sudan’s strategic location by the waters of the Nile, its abundance of minerals and natural resources, and its great agricultural potential, it is eyed by foreign powers. Egypt, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, and the U.S. vie to play a “political, military, economic, or ideological role” in Sudan’s future.
Sudan will be a “test case” to see if the West will take steps to ensure Sudan’s stability, and if the U.S. will make this a priority, said Fernandez. “Some might say,” he noted, “that for the United States, the most important thing for Sudan is stability, and if that stability comes from the barrel of a gun, stability is better than chaos. Pro-American stability, a pro-American dictatorship, is better than one that is, say, closer to Russia or China.”
Is all that extravagant rhetoric of the U.S. about democracy and fighting authoritarianism and all of that, is that just rhetoric, or are the Americans sincere?
Fernandez did not endorse this view. Rather, he characterized the question of whether the U.S. will support democratization in Sudan as a test case regarding claims of U.S. and Western decline. “We’re facing a situation where there’s going to be a real challenge for U.S. foreign policy. Is all that extravagant rhetoric of the United States about democracy and fighting authoritarianism and all of that, is that ... just rhetoric, or are the Americans sincere? Or is that just beyond our reach now? Are we declining and, in a sense, our capabilities are much more limited?”
Ideally, the preferred outcome is a democratic Sudan that can create a path for the talents and potential of the people to flourish. But Fernandez did not dismiss American geo-political concerns and interests. The main fear of any U.S. government is that Sudan’s eruption into chaos and war will destabilize the region. Fernandez fears that if a future regime undergoes economic or political difficulties, “it may double down on using the Islam card as a way to cover its incompetence or criminality” — a practice frequently seen in the Arab and Muslim worlds.
It is important for the U.S. to continue to elicit counterterrorism cooperation from Khartoum, block Russia from establishing a naval base on the Red Sea, and hinder Sudan from drawing closer to China. Europe’s priority is to continue benefiting from Sudan’s prevention of the northern migration of African refugees and their illegal entry into the European continent.
Fernandez said that Sudan would benefit greatly from foreign investment and international assistance if it manages to establish a modicum of peace “internally.” As a poor country, it is in Sudan’s best interest to seek good relations with all its neighbors and foreign powers in order to stabilize its economy. Fernandez said that Sudan “is a country in transition” that can go “one of many different ways.” His hope is that it will be the one that is “open to the world and to the West.”
Alberto M. Fernandez, vice president of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), spoke to a December 9th Middle East Forum Webinar (video) about the current situation in Sudan and its implications for the U.S. and the West.
Fernandez noted that since it gained its independence in 1956, Sudan, one of the largest countries in Africa and the Arab world with a population of forty million, has been racked by civil wars and military coups every few years. Although a military coup in 1969 overthrew a democratically elected government and brought Islamists to power, Fernandez said that Sudan, “unlike other countries in the Arab world,” has a long history of democratic rule. Comprehensive peace accords in 2005 brought some stability to the country and eventually led to an independent South Sudan.
In 2019, hundreds of thousands of Sudanese took to the streets to protest the dictatorship of the Islamist, Omar Bashir, who “promoted [an] Islamist revolution throughout Africa.”
In 2019, hundreds of thousands of Sudanese took to the streets to protest the dictatorship of the Islamist, Omar Bashir, who “promoted [an] Islamist revolution throughout Africa” and welcomed bin Laden and al Qaeda into Sudan. Despite his anti-Americanism, Bashir feared U.S. power. His placement on a terrorism list and the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the country prevented him from conducting international business and caused him to later “pragmatically [work] with the Americans.” The protesting populace, aided by the military, ousted Bashir’s almost thirty-year-long regime. In the years immediately following the 2019 coup, the military built a vast complex of economic, commercial, and military holdings, and the generals who overthrew Bashir were unwilling to give up their power.
A temporary civilian component of the Sudanese government, formed with the assistance of the international community, was designed to lead the new government towards agreed-upon special elections. Headed by an international civil servant, Abdalla Hamdok, Sudan made some progress toward democratic reforms. Hamdok instituted freedom of the press and freedom of religion and rid Sudan of blasphemy and apostasy laws. He even met with the family of the late Islamic Sudanese thinker, Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, who had been executed as a heretic by a pro-American Sudanese government in 1985. Taha, who had preached a tolerant, humanistic Islam, had become a “martyr of freedom of expression and religious freedom in Sudan.”
However, in 2021, the military launched another coup which overthrew the temporary civilian body of the Sudanese government. Fernandez said that Sudan is now in a “dire situation” in that the country is being run by a divided military instead of a government. The two factions within the armed forces are the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), with General Mohan as its acting head of state, and the “rapid support services” led by General Dagalo, aka Hemetti. In addition to the two divided authoritarian military elements, “lurking in the background” are Bashir’s Islamists itching to return to power.
The political climate in Sudan since 2021 has hence been one of “great uncertainty,” Fernandez said. He noted also conflicting reports of a split in the army between those “favoring” and those “distancing themselves” from the Islamists. The Sudanese people have peacefully demonstrated against the military dictatorship, and thousands have been arrested, injured, or killed by the security forces. The international community has applied pressure on the military regime to craft yet another “complex” framework agreement to reestablish a democratic civilian process that would lead to elections in two years.
In the framework of the Trump Administration’s Abraham Accords, Sudan was removed from the terrorism list and had its banking economic profile normalized.
In the framework of the Trump Administration’s Abraham Accords, Sudan was removed from the terrorism list and had its banking economic profile normalized, thereby giving it access to the World Bank and international loans. Trump also demanded that Sudan agree to pay $400 million in reparations to the victims of the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa. Those attacks were “planned and carried out from Sudan” by al Qaeda.
Fernandez said that “Sudanese history is littered with all kinds of peace accords, political agreements, and arrangements that have been subverted, usually by the military.” Because of Sudan’s strategic location by the waters of the Nile, its abundance of minerals and natural resources, and its great agricultural potential, it is eyed by foreign powers. Egypt, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, and the U.S. vie to play a “political, military, economic, or ideological role” in Sudan’s future.
Fernandez said Sudan will be a “test case” to see if the West will take steps to ensure Sudan’s stability, and if the U.S. will make this a priority. “Some might say,” he noted, “that for the United States, the most important thing for Sudan is stability, and if that stability comes from the barrel of a gun, stability is better than chaos. Pro-American stability, a pro-American dictatorship, is better than one that is, say, closer to Russia or China.”
Fernandez did not endorse this view. Rather, he characterized the question of whether the U.S. will support democratization in Sudan as a test case regarding claims of U.S. and Western decline. “We’re facing a situation where there’s going to be a real challenge for U.S. foreign policy. Is all that extravagant rhetoric of the United States about democracy and fighting authoritarianism and all of that, is that ... just rhetoric, or are the Americans sincere? Or is that just beyond our reach now? Are we declining and, in a sense, our capabilities are much more limited?”
Ideally, the preferred outcome is a democratic Sudan that can create a path for the talents and potential of the people to flourish. But Fernandez did not dismiss American geo-political concerns and interests. The main fear of any U.S. government is that Sudan’s eruption into chaos and war will destabilize the region. Fernandez fears that if a future regime undergoes economic or political difficulties, “it may double down on using the Islam card as a way to cover its incompetence or criminality” — a practice frequently seen in the Arab and Muslim worlds.
As a poor country, it is in Sudan’s best interest to seek good relations with all its neighbors and foreign powers in order to stabilize its economy.
It is important for the U.S. to continue to elicit counterterrorism cooperation from Khartoum, block Russia from establishing a naval base on the Red Sea, and hinder Sudan from drawing closer to China. Europe’s priority is to continue benefiting from Sudan’s prevention of the northern migration of African refugees and their illegal entry into the European continent.
Fernandez said that Sudan would benefit greatly from foreign investment and international assistance if it manages to establish a modicum of peace “internally.” As a poor country, it is in Sudan’s best interest to seek good relations with all its neighbors and foreign powers in order to stabilize its economy. Fernandez said that Sudan “is a country in transition” that can go “one of many different ways.” His hope is that it will be the one that is “open to the world and to the West.”
