Sudan's Opposition Accuses Hemedti of 'Eluding' to Remain in Power

Widespread protests in Khartoum demanding civilian-led rule (Reuters)
Widespread protests in Khartoum demanding civilian-led rule (Reuters)
TT

Sudan's Opposition Accuses Hemedti of 'Eluding' to Remain in Power

Widespread protests in Khartoum demanding civilian-led rule (Reuters)
Widespread protests in Khartoum demanding civilian-led rule (Reuters)

Sudan's Vice President of the Sovereign Council Mohammad Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, voiced support to the army's measures to withdraw from politics.

Some opposition factions considered that Hemedti's position was not new, saying it was one of the military tactics to remain in power.

Hemedti, also the Rapid Support Forces commander, pledged to relinquish power to civilians, stressing that the military institution would not remain in power, calling on the uniformed services personnel to devote themselves to fulfilling their duties.

He added that the President of the Council decided to provide the opportunity for the revolutionary and national forces to agree on a civilian-led government without interference from the military establishment.

"All the revolutionary and national political forces must speed up reaching urgent solutions that lead to the formation of transitional governance institutions," he noted.

Hemedti affirmed his commitment to work with the Sudanese army and all the nationals to ensure the military institution will carry out its constitutional tasks, reform the military and security institution, and complete the security arrangements as stipulated in the Juba Peace Agreement.

He urged an urgent political solution to the country's crises between all political and revolutionary forces.

Hemedti said that he discussed with Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan withdrawing the army from the political talks.

On Jul 04, Sudan's leading general, the country's military, will withdraw from negotiations meant to solve the ongoing political crisis after a last-minute coup, allowing civil society representatives to take their place.

Hemedti warned of "local and foreign schemes" against the country, saying the current crisis in Sudan is the most dangerous in its modern history, threatening its unity, safety, and security.

The military official asserted that he would not remain silent about anything threatening Sudan's stability, security, and citizens.

Member of the National Umma Party politburo, Yasser Jalal, told Asharq Al-Awsat that Hemedti's current position is part of the army's tactics in dealing with the political crisis they created following the coup last October.

Jalal stressed that the military institution continues to perform political functions that are not among the tasks of the military institutions, referring to Hemedti's talk about his return to Darfur to pursue the peace talks.

The official noted that Hemedti's reference to a unified professional army was not clear about the fate of his forces and whether he would accept their integration into the armed forces or refer to other armed factions.

Jalal clarified that although the Rapid Support Forces are part of the armed forces, they are independent and exercise their functions utterly free from other uniformed services.

The Umma Party official noted that there would be no democratic transition in the country without integrating the armed factions into the army and subjecting them to the political decision represented by the civilian authority.



Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Deal Compared to Swiss Cheese, Full of Gaps

Israelis block road in Jerusalem, demanding agreement implementation and hostage release (AFP)
Israelis block road in Jerusalem, demanding agreement implementation and hostage release (AFP)
TT

Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Deal Compared to Swiss Cheese, Full of Gaps

Israelis block road in Jerusalem, demanding agreement implementation and hostage release (AFP)
Israelis block road in Jerusalem, demanding agreement implementation and hostage release (AFP)

The ceasefire and prisoner exchange deal reached between Israel and Hamas on Wednesday evening is facing a crisis that could prevent it from going forward before it gets Israeli approval or is put into effect.
The agreement is full of gaps, much like Swiss cheese. Despite outlining three phases aimed at bringing the war to a close, it is accompanied by Israeli military actions that continue to claim dozens of lives in Gaza.
Asharq Al-Awsat reviewed the deal’s terms and the different interpretations from both sides.
The first issue comes from the opening of the agreement’s appendix: Practical procedures and mechanisms to implement the agreement for the exchange of Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners and the return to a sustainable calm which would achieve a permanent ceasefire between the two sides.
What does “sustainable calm” mean? In Israel, officials say it means Israel has the right to resume fighting after the first phase. Palestinians, however, claim US President-elect Donald Trump’s administration has promised the war won’t restart. Both sides interpret the term differently.
The goal of the agreement is clear: release all Israeli prisoners—alive or dead—captured by Palestinians. In return, Israel will release a “negotiated number” of Palestinian prisoners.
The exchange is set to begin on “Day One,” the day the ceasefire takes effect, but it's still unclear when that will be.
In the first phase (42 days), the agreement calls for “a temporary halt to military operations by both sides and the withdrawal of the Israeli army eastward” from “high-population areas along the Gaza border, including the Gaza Valley.”
Hamas claims the maps provided for this were incomplete.
Even though the agreement mentions “the return of displaced people to their homes and withdrawal from Gaza Valley,” people will have to walk several kilometers and vehicles will be inspected, which could lead to disagreements and clashes.
As for humanitarian aid, the agreement allows for its entry starting on “Day One” (600 trucks daily, including 50 fuel trucks, with 300 heading to northern Gaza).
This includes fuel for the power plant and equipment for debris removal, rehabilitation, and hospital operations.
But the agreement doesn’t clarify how the aid will be distributed or who will control it. Will Hamas continue to oversee it? Will Israel agree? If Hamas takes charge, what happens then? This could lead to further complications.
The criteria for the first phase of the prisoner exchange are clear, but the agreement states that “the prisoner exchange terms for the first phase will not apply to the second phase.”
Hamas wants more Palestinian prisoners released, but Israel rejects this. If disagreements have arisen over clear criteria in the first phase, what will happen when the criteria are more vague?
The agreement sets a deadline of “Day 16” for indirect talks to finalize the conditions for the second phase, particularly regarding the prisoner exchange.
One clause is seen by Israel as not requiring it to carry out the second phase, while Hamas views it as a guarantee to prevent the war from restarting. The clause states: “Qatar, the US, and Egypt will make every effort to ensure continued indirect negotiations until both sides agree on the terms for the second phase.”
However, the phrase “make every effort” does not create a binding legal obligation.
The agreement is full of gaps that could become major problems for both sides. While this doesn’t mean the deal should be dismissed, it shows that many parts of the agreement are fragile and depend on mutual trust and good intentions—both of which are lacking in this region.