Would it change anyone's view of todays agreement if it were understood that the Taqadum coalition was financed by UAE? Or that UAE helped advise/implement the attack on Wad Madani or Hemedti's regional tour or his meeting with Hamdok and this agreement?🧵reuters.com
The words in the agreement are tantalizing especially for a population that has endured so much in the last 8month. But making commitments and signing agreements has never been the problem in Sudan. The dustbin of Sudan's history is full of broken agreements, most recently Jeddah
Much of what is committed to here makes sense and I among others have called for it before. Rather, I fear a population rightfully desperate for peace could now be willing to cut a deal with the devil to end the bloodshed but could end up selling their soul. Yes, short term gain,
but at what long term cost? And Im not talking about being ruled by Hemedti and the RSF. Im talking about being owned by UAE. That's the implication whose significance will resonate in Chad, Niger, Ethiopia, Eritrea and a dozen other countries across the region if this deal is
widely accepted. I said before, the last few weeks have felt like a well-choreographed and strategic campaign not only to shift the tide of the war, which was shifting long before, but to rewrite the history of the conflict and expunge the records of its grossest perpetrators.
After all, history is written by the victors. And with the upper hand in the conflict now, the RSF/UAE have grabbed a pen with their free hand to erase and rewrite their role in the destruction, rape and theft of the country. As much as I think it would be catastrophic for the
region if they succeeded, I also don't live in Sudan and suffer the daily deprivations and worries of having a life or family there. But what I do know is that the agreement doesnt count for much if the SAF doesnt join. They have been quiet recently, but are clearly in a corner.
Frankly they would be foolish to join talks convened by Hamdok and his Taqadum coalition, who are convincingly captured by the RSF and UAE, both financially and politically. Could IGAD return to help mediate a new round of talks? That feels unlikely given Djibouti's new concerns
with Ethiopia-Somaliland, plus the fact that IGAD couldnt even bother to name its promised special envoy coming out of the leaders summit 3 wks ago. Sadly, it feels like a moment when broader international diplomacy needs to step in and fill the gaps left by the region. Does that
mean the US/UN/Troika/AU or some ad hoc coalition possibly with others like KSA, UAE, Turkey, Egypt? Cant say. This is because after 8 months of fighting international diplomacy is still ad hoc at best. But what I predict is those Western states will equivocate.
Washington is now pretty reliably anti-RSF, seeing the true nature of their crimes and leaders. But they will say something like, "we support efforts to bring civilians together" or better yet "we support Sudanese owned and led processes to restore the transition." But that
kicks the can and avoids the hard question of whether to support this arrangement and invest the political capital in bringing the SAF. I dont want to dismiss out of hand any deal to hasten the end of suffering for so many millions, but to be abundantly clear about a few things
1. The RSF has not and will not change its spots. Its a genocidal militia that has been true to its nature since April 15. Also true to its nature is making commitments it has no intent to keep.
2. The Taqadum has proven in big ways and small to have been captured by the RSF/UAE.
2. The Taqadum has proven in big ways and small to have been captured by the RSF/UAE.
Led by a person who largely failed as PM, who was/is criminally indecisive and unstrategic, putting your faith in him now to lead the people out of this national nightmare would be foolhardy. He is counting on the proverb that in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
What this agreement is offering is a mirage. Its a glass of water in the desert. But itsnt real. To make it real requires both the SAF, which is neither incentivized nor compelled to step to the table. That's where international diplomacy should step in. But will it?
Their track record suggests more laudatory rhetoric followed by half measures. I would not count on anyone parachuting in to make this agreement any more credible or lasting. So where does that leave it? No one, I think, wants the fighting to continue. Indeed, I think both, for
different reasons, would welcome a face saving way out at this point. In the words of Sun Tzu, "a golden bridge for them retreat across." But neither will retreat if the other end of that bridge is the ICC or Kober prison. IGAD/AU seems the most likely source to help bring the
sides together at this stage, as imperfect as that is. Washington and Brussels and KSA can help with that. Ultimately, I think there are a lot more twists and turns before a transition is restored and credible civilians are in charge. So this should be thought of in phases.
The most urgent is freezing the war/getting aid to those who need it. Phase 2 a political deal and Phase 3 implementation. Today's deal tries to tie up all those phases neatly but with only 1 belligerent and no external support. Before we dismiss it entirely, make phase 1 work.#
جاري تحميل الاقتراحات...