Sudan’s Fragile Transition to Democracy at Stake as Rival Camps Flex Muscles

Sudanese protesters take part in a rally demanding the dissolution of the country's transitional government in Khartoum on Saturday, October 16, 2021. © Marwan Ali, AP
Sudanese protesters take part in a rally demanding the dissolution of the country's transitional government in Khartoum on Saturday, October 16, 2021. © Marwan Ali, AP
TT

Sudan’s Fragile Transition to Democracy at Stake as Rival Camps Flex Muscles

Sudanese protesters take part in a rally demanding the dissolution of the country's transitional government in Khartoum on Saturday, October 16, 2021. © Marwan Ali, AP
Sudanese protesters take part in a rally demanding the dissolution of the country's transitional government in Khartoum on Saturday, October 16, 2021. © Marwan Ali, AP

Supporters of Sudan’s transitional government have called for mass rallies in Khartoum on Thursday amid fears the military is plotting to withdraw its support for an uneasy power-sharing agreement, more than two years after a popular uprising led to the overthrow of veteran autocrat Omar al-Bashir.

The call to protest sets the stage for a possible showdown between rival camps in the Sudanese capital, where supporters of military rule have held a sit-in outside the presidential palace since Saturday, calling for the dissolution of the country’s embattled transitional government.

The looming confrontation on the streets caps a month of escalating tensions between the military and a coalition of civilian political parties, who have ruled the country under a precarious power-sharing deal following Bashir’s removal in April 2019, AFP reported.

The two camps have repeatedly traded barbs since an apparent coup attempt in late September, with army leaders demanding a cabinet overhaul and politicians accusing the military of plotting a power grab. Civilian officials have blamed both Bashir loyalists and the military for stirring up unrest, including in the east of the country where tribal protesters have been blocking shipping at the crucial Red Sea hub of Port Sudan, exacerbating shortages stemming from the country’s long-running economic crisis.

Pleading for unity last week, Abdallah Hamdok, Sudan’s civilian prime minister, said the attempted coup had “opened the door for discord, and for all the hidden disputes and accusations from all sides". In this way, he added, “we are throwing the future of our country and people and revolution to the wind."

Ousting Bashir, and then what?

The escalating tensions in the troubled nation of 40 million have raised alarm bells in the region and beyond – though experts sound unsurprised. If anything, it is remarkable that Sudan’s uneasy transition has made it this far, says Professor Natasha Lindstaedt of the University of Essex, stressing the toxic legacy of three decades under Bashir’s autocratic rule.

“Bashir was a very personalistic dictator who caused institutions around him to decay, leaving behind a weak state and an institutional void,” she explains.

The “monumental undertaking” of Bashir’s ouster has seen relatively little bloodletting – aside from a bloody June 2019 crackdown on protesters – and, so far, a bumpy but largely peaceful transition, notes Lindstaedt, who has written extensively about attempts to transition from authoritarian to democratic regimes.

“It could’ve turned into a civil war, but it didn’t,” she says. In the end, Sudan took a middle way, even though the unity between civilians and the military is largely a façade.”

Civilian leaders remain suspicious of the army’s intentions, while key military figures are fearful of losing privileges acquired during the Bashir era. Some have been unnerved by calls for the extradition of the former strongman and his allies to the International Criminal Court, where they are wanted for alleged war crimes in Darfur.

Other civilian goals include purging Bashir’s allies, seizing assets and putting the military’s extensive economic holdings under civilian control.

The trouble, says Lindstaedt, is that Sudan is largely deprived of the key requirements for a successful democratic transition, such as political parties and functioning state institutions. Moreover, its civilian leaders have struggled to find much common ground beyond their opposition to Bashir, undermining their pitch in a sprawling country scarred by regional conflicts and a biting economic crisis.

“The civilian camp is too weak, too loose a coalition of different groups and interests,” adds Lindstaedt. “It needs a platform, a program that is not just, ‘We don’t want Bashir’.”

Divisions within the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC) – the umbrella civilian alliance that brought together Bashir’s opponents in 2019 – have presented the military with an opening to portray itself as the one stable entity that is above the fray, says David Kiwuwa, a professor of international studies at the University of Nottingham-Ningbo in China.

“Are they [the military] looking with glee as the civilian camp starts to unravel? Of course they are, because the more the civilians are unable to get their act together, the more they put the military in sharp contrast,” he explains.

Politicians have accused army leaders of exploiting divisions in the civilian camp and fanning popular discontent against the transitional government. They point out that pro-army demonstrators have been bussed into the capital, swelling the ranks of anti-government protesters, and have been left alone by unusually lenient security forces.

Senior military figures, like Mohamed Hamdan “Hemeti” Dagolo, the former head of the notorious Janjaweed militia and current head of the ruling Sovereign Council, have spoken disparagingly of politicians’ self-interest and compared it with the military’s purported selfless dedication to the good of the nation.

The battle for public opinion has also moved online, Reuters reported on Tuesday, noting that Facebook has recently shut down large networks used by Bashir loyalists to spread misinformation and agitate for a military takeover in Khartoum and civil disobedience in the east.

Fears of manipulation are certainly founded, says Michelle Gavin, the Ralph Bunche senior fellow for Africa policy studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, though cautioning that they should not distract from the real concerns and discontent voiced by the Sudanese people.

“While it is very likely that the apparent popular enthusiasm for military government is orchestrated by those in the security services who fear losing access to power, there are genuine grievances they can seize on to bolster their case,” she points out. “There is no question that many Sudanese civilians are impatient with the pace of reform and economic recovery, and dismayed by infighting within the transitional government that distracts from tackling larger social issues.”

Two years after Bashir ouster, protesters in Sudan decry slow political reform

Only a month ago, civilian officials were celebrating signs that Sudan’s protracted economic crisis was easing following promises of debt relief and international financing. Since then, however, unrest in the east has resulted in Khartoum experiencing acute shortages of bread and imported staples. This in turn has stoked anger at the government and overshadowed its less tangible achievements.

“The transitional government has made some progress, for instance in negotiating peace deals with rebellions, in matters of justice and reconciliation, freedoms in the public space and political prisoners,” says Kiwuwa. “But, at the end of the day, it’s matters of bread and butter that are the real pressing concern.”

Nation building

After precipitating the fall of Bashir back in 2019, will spiraling bread prices – a traditional trigger of popular uprisings – now help the military topple civilian rulers?

Sudan’s power-sharing deal “was always going to be an uneasy marriage", he says. “But we haven’t necessarily reached a tipping point. The military is still wary of being seen to shove aside its civilian partner, which would spell the failure of the revolution and trigger widespread anger. It needs civilian help.”

International pressure is also being brought to bear, with a flurry of high-level officials recently stopping in Khartoum, including World Bank President David Malpass and US Special Envoy Jeffrey Feltman. Washington has warned that any military takeover would result in a return to the sanctions that hobbled the country under Bashir, and a rollback of debt forgiveness and international financing that are among the transition's biggest achievements.

As for the motley coalition that makes up Sudan’s “civilian” camp, it has “no other option than to continue the conversation, hoping to build some form of consensus in the years to come", says Kiwuwa.

“Sudan is facing an existential problem in how to build a Sudan for all the Sudanese,” he adds. “But you need to reach a measure of consensus in the first instance in order to understand what institutions to build.”



Sudan in 25 Years: One War Begets Another

Fleeing the fighting, people are transported by truck from the border town of Renk in South Sudan to a dock to continue their journey to the next destination (DPA)
Fleeing the fighting, people are transported by truck from the border town of Renk in South Sudan to a dock to continue their journey to the next destination (DPA)
TT

Sudan in 25 Years: One War Begets Another

Fleeing the fighting, people are transported by truck from the border town of Renk in South Sudan to a dock to continue their journey to the next destination (DPA)
Fleeing the fighting, people are transported by truck from the border town of Renk in South Sudan to a dock to continue their journey to the next destination (DPA)

The sound of gunfire, barrel bombs, and stray bullets is nothing new in Sudan. What’s new is that the violence has moved from the outskirts to the capital, Khartoum. This shift forced the government and military to relocate to a temporary capital in Port Sudan, nearly 1,000 kilometers away on the Red Sea coast.
Past conflicts were seen as rebellions against the state, but they stemmed from a deeper struggle: the “center” holds all the power and resources, while the “margins” are left with nothing.
These wars have always been about demands for rights and equality.
Under Islamist President Omar al-Bashir, Sudan’s wars shifted from demands for rights to a “religious war” between the Muslim north and the Christian or secular south. This led to South Sudan’s secession and the creation of a new state that joined the United Nations. But what drives the conflicts that continue to devastate Sudan?
Analysts say the root cause is the lack of a national vision and the failure to recognize Sudan’s ethnic and cultural diversity. Without a unified political and economic framework, this diversity has been ignored.
The current war, though fought between two formal armies, stems from the same issues of marginalization and exclusion. These problems sparked Sudan’s first rebellion in 1955, led by the Anya-Nya 1 forces, named after the cobra snake.
The Naivasha Agreement
Sudan’s first civil war ended with the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement but reignited in 1983 after former President Jaafar Nimeiri imposed Islamic Sharia law. This sparked a rebellion led by John Garang’s Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).
The conflict escalated into a “jihadist” war as Islamist forces framed it as a battle against “enemies of the faith.” The fighting lasted for years, killing more than two million people.
Unable to secure a military victory, the government signed the Naivasha Agreement in Kenya. The deal granted South Sudan the right to self-determination, with a five-year transitional period to decide between unity or independence.
John Garang briefly became Sudan’s First Vice President during this period but died in a mysterious helicopter crash. His deputy, Salva Kiir, succeeded him and led South Sudan to a 2011 referendum, where the region voted for independence. South Sudan became a new nation, taking a third of Sudan’s land, a quarter of its people, and most of its resources.
Meanwhile, conflict spread to Darfur in 2003, with rebels accusing the government of marginalization. The war turned ethnic when the government armed Arab militias, known as the Janjaweed, to fight African-origin rebel groups. One Janjaweed leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, or Hemedti, later became the head of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
The Darfur war claimed 300,000 lives. Al-Bashir’s government was accused of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, leading to International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Bashir and three senior officials that remain in effect.
Chasing Peace Across Capitals
In May 2006, Sudan’s government signed a peace deal in Abuja with a faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) led by Minni Arko Minnawi. However, the movement split, and another faction, led by Abdel Wahid al-Nur, rejected the deal and continued fighting from Jebel Marra in central Darfur.
Minnawi briefly joined the government as an assistant to President Omar al-Bashir but later rebelled again, claiming he was treated as a "kitchen helper" rather than a serious political partner.
Efforts to negotiate peace moved between capitals. In 2011, some groups signed the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur in Qatar, which promised power and wealth-sharing, but fighting continued.
In 2020, Sudan’s transitional government signed a new peace agreement in Juba with key armed groups, including Minnawi’s faction and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) led by Gibril Ibrahim.
The deal gave Minnawi the role of Darfur governor and Ibrahim the post of finance minister. Despite these accords, true peace remains out of reach.
A New Southern Conflict
War broke out in South Kordofan and Blue Nile, two regions given a right to “popular consultation” under the Naivasha Agreement to decide their future. The SPLM-North, an offshoot of the southern SPLM, took up arms again.
The SPLM-N split into two factions: one led by Malik Agar, now a deputy in Sudan’s Sovereign Council, who signed the 2020 Juba Peace Agreement; the other, led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, controls Kauda in South Kordofan and continues sporadic fighting.
Eastern Sudan also saw conflict in the 1990s, with groups like the Beja Congress and Free Lions opposing Bashir’s regime. These groups later signed the Asmara Peace Agreement, gaining shares of power and wealth.
In April 2019, months of protests forced the military to oust President Omar al-Bashir. But sit-ins continued, and a violent crackdown killed hundreds, drawing condemnation as a horrific crime against civilians.
Under public pressure, the military signed a constitutional declaration in August 2019, agreeing to share power with civilians. This led to a transitional government with Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, and a Sovereign Council headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and his deputy, Hemedti.
War of the Generals
On October 25, 2021, Sudan's army leader overthrew Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok’s civilian government in a coup. Under pressure from peaceful protests, the general later agreed to a framework agreement with civilian leaders, promising a return to civilian rule and preventing the return of the Islamist regime.
However, supporters of the former regime undermined the deal, causing tensions between the army and the RSF, leading to war.
On April 15, 2023, gunfire broke out in southern Khartoum, marking the start of the ongoing conflict. The RSF accused the army of attacking its camps, while some claim Islamist cells within the army targeted the RSF, forcing it to choose between surrender or war.
Miscalculations
The war was expected to end quickly due to the army’s stronger military. However, the RSF surprised the army by using urban warfare tactics to take control of key military bases and government buildings, including the presidential palace.
The government moved to Port Sudan, while Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan was trapped for over three months before escaping.
The RSF expanded its control over Darfur, western Sudan, and the central Gezira region, holding about 70% of the country. After nearly two years of fighting, the army regained some areas, but the RSF still controls large parts of Sudan and continues fierce fighting, with the war still ongoing.
The Worst Humanitarian Crisis
The war in Sudan has killed tens of thousands and triggered what the UN calls "the worst humanitarian crisis in history." More than 11 million people are displaced within Sudan, while around 3 million have fled to neighboring countries. Over half of Sudan’s population, about 25 million people, face severe food insecurity.
Negotiations have failed, with both sides refusing to return to talks after the Jeddah Humanitarian Declaration collapsed, largely due to the army’s and its supporters' refusal to engage.
Root Causes
Former Sovereign Council member and deputy head of the Democratic Civil Forces Coordination “Tagadum,” Al-Hadi Idris blames the war on Sudan’s failure to agree on a “national development plan” since independence.
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, he says the main reasons for the conflict are the failure to implement fair development, achieve justice, and the lack of resolution on key issues like the role of religion in politics, national identity, and military involvement in government.
Idris argues that addressing these issues is crucial to ending the war for good.
Mohamed Abdel-Hakim, a leader in the Unionist Gathering, believes the wars stem from unequal development and citizenship.
He says resolving issues like marginalization, protecting people’s rights, and replacing oppressive regimes with democratic governance is key to stopping Sudan’s long-running conflicts.
Abdel-Hakim also calls for reforming the military to create a professional, national army focused on protecting the constitution and civilian leadership, with strict oversight to prevent the army from becoming politicized.