2019 Is a Year the Sudanese Will Never Forget

The Sudanese Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change sign the political agreement that paved the way for the formation of the transitional government in Khartoum last August (Reuters)
The Sudanese Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change sign the political agreement that paved the way for the formation of the transitional government in Khartoum last August (Reuters)
TT
20

2019 Is a Year the Sudanese Will Never Forget

The Sudanese Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change sign the political agreement that paved the way for the formation of the transitional government in Khartoum last August (Reuters)
The Sudanese Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change sign the political agreement that paved the way for the formation of the transitional government in Khartoum last August (Reuters)

The Sudanese will not forget 2019 and their revolution, the revolution that brought down the most brutal dictatorship in the country’s history. They will forget not the bloodshed, the rapists, or the groans of the tortured. They will not forget the year with many days of hope, the year they weaved a “portrait of defiance” in the face of the regime’s brutality.

The Sudanese celebrated their revolution’s first anniversary on the 19th of December, the country’s third revolution after the October and March revolutions of 1964 and 1985. The revolution continues a year after it began and months after its victory on the 11th of April.

The revolution inherited arbitrary wars throughout the country and a flabby and corrupt state apparatus controlled by the regime’s Islamist cronies. The new government is fighting hard to find peace, retrieve the state from them, and instill an honest and efficient apparatus in its place.

The revolution’s story

After four months of uninterrupted peaceful protesting, the popular movement brought an end to Omar al-Bashir’s 30-year reign. The 6th of April, five days before Bashir was brought down, as the myth of the legendarily repressive state was shattered by the huge numbers who confronted the army in the capital.

The Sudanese Professionals Association

The Sudanese Professionals Association, an association of professional syndicates, adopted the movement’s demands and called for a protest in Khartoum, which would head to the palace and ask the president to resign on December 25th; they were met with gunfire and tear gas at the hand of the security forces. Protests continued, and on the 1st of January last year, the “Declaration of Freedom and Change” was born and adopted by most of the country’s opposition parties and civil society organizations. Thus the Forces of Freedom and Change alliance was formed.

Sit-in facing Army Command

By the end of March 2019, the regime had begun to crumble under the weight of the movement, and Bashir appeared shaken in the speeches he delivered to his supporters.

Social media played a pivotal role in documenting the killing of peaceful demonstrators, exposing the major transgressions perpetrated by the regime's security apparatus to the world.

“Forces for the Declaration of Freedom and Change” announced that a march to the General Command of the Sudanese Army would take place on April 6, the anniversary of the 1986 uprising against President Jaafar Nimeiri. As the sun set that day, millions of people surrounded the army leadership, and the alliance declared that the sit-in would persist until the president stepped down. The security services and the Islamists’ militias tried to break the sit-in by force, but they failed after attempts.

Tragedy at the sit-in

When the army announced that Bashir would be removed on April 11th to be replaced by a military council led by its former Lieutenant General, Awad Ibn Auf with Lieutenant-General Kamal Abdel Maarouf as his deputy. Both men had been members security committee set up by Bashir to quell the protests, and a massive sit-in was held in response immediately. Under the weight of its pressure, Ibn Auf resigned and the military council was dissolved, and he announced the formation of a new council headed by Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the Inspector General of the Army at the time, and the current Transitional Council Chairman. Tragedy in struck in a sit-in on June 3 third, the security forces committed a massacre next to the army leadership base, killing dozens wounding hundreds, ending the Forces of Change's relationship with the military. In response, what is known as the giant June 30 processions, were held, shifting the balance of power in the favor of revolutionary forces.

African mediation and the constitutional document

Regional mediation, led by Ethiopia and the African Union, supported by the international community, succeeded in compelling them to sign a sharing agreement on August 17th after holding marathon negotiations and putting intense pressure on the junta and revolutionary forces,



Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
TT
20

Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP

By casting doubt on the world order, Donald Trump risks dragging the globe back into an era where great powers impose their imperial will on the weak, analysts warn.
Russia wants Ukraine, China demands Taiwan and now the US president seems to be following suit, whether by coveting Canada as the "51st US state", insisting "we've got to have" Greenland or kicking Chinese interests out of the Panama Canal.
Where the United States once defended state sovereignty and international law, Trump's disregard for his neighbors' borders and expansionist ambitions mark a return to the days when the world was carved up into spheres of influence.
As recently as Wednesday, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth floated the idea of an American military base to secure the Panama Canal, a strategic waterway controlled by the United States until 1999 which Trump's administration has vowed to "take back".
Hegseth's comments came nearly 35 years after the United States invaded to topple Panama's dictator Manuel Noriega, harking back to when successive US administrations viewed Latin America as "America's backyard".
"The Trump 2.0 administration is largely accepting the familiar great power claim to 'spheres of influence'," Professor Gregory O. Hall, of the University of Kentucky, told AFP.
Indian diplomat Jawed Ashraf warned that by "speaking openly about Greenland, Canada, Panama Canal", "the new administration may have accelerated the slide" towards a return to great power domination.
The empire strikes back
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has posed as the custodian of an international order "based on the ideas of countries' equal sovereignty and territorial integrity", said American researcher Jeffrey Mankoff, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But those principles run counter to how Russia and China see their own interests, according to the author of "Empires of Eurasia: how imperial legacies shape international security".
Both countries are "themselves products of empires and continue to function in many ways like empires", seeking to throw their weight around for reasons of prestige, power or protection, Mankoff said.
That is not to say that spheres of influence disappeared with the fall of the Soviet Union.
"Even then, the US and Western allies sought to expand their sphere of influence eastward into what was the erstwhile Soviet and then the Russian sphere of influence," Ashraf, a former adviser to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, pointed out.
But until the return of Trump, the United States exploited its position as the "policeman of the world" to ward off imperial ambitions while pushing its own interests.
Now that Trump appears to view the cost of upholding a rules-based order challenged by its rivals and increasingly criticized in the rest of the world as too expensive, the United States is contributing to the cracks in the facade with Russia and China's help.
And as the international order weakens, the great powers "see opportunities to once again behave in an imperial way", said Mankoff.
Yalta yet again
As at Yalta in 1945, when the United States and the Soviet Union divided the post-World War II world between their respective zones of influence, Washington, Beijing and Moscow could again agree to carve up the globe anew.
"Improved ties between the United States and its great-power rivals, Russia and China, appear to be imminent," Derek Grossman, of the United States' RAND Corporation think tank, said in March.
But the haggling over who gets dominance over what and where would likely come at the expense of other countries.
"Today's major powers are seeking to negotiate a new global order primarily with each other," Monica Toft, professor of international relations at Tufts University in Massachusets wrote in the journal Foreign Affairs.
"In a scenario in which the United States, China, and Russia all agree that they have a vital interest in avoiding a nuclear war, acknowledging each other's spheres of influence can serve as a mechanism to deter escalation," Toft said.
If that were the case, "negotiations to end the war in Ukraine could resemble a new Yalta", she added.
Yet the thought of a Ukraine deemed by Trump to be in Russia's sphere is likely to send shivers down the spines of many in Europe -- not least in Ukraine itself.
"The success or failure of Ukraine to defend its sovereignty is going to have a lot of impact in terms of what the global system ends up looking like a generation from now," Mankoff said.
"So it's important for countries that have the ability and want to uphold an anti-imperial version of international order to assist Ukraine," he added -- pointing the finger at Europe.
"In Trump's world, Europeans need their own sphere of influence," said Rym Momtaz, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace.
"For former imperial powers, Europeans seem strangely on the backfoot as nineteenth century spheres of influence come back as the organising principle of global affairs."