An Analysis of Agar’s Speech: The Importance of Timing and Expression of State Vision

Cairo – Sudanhorizon: Sabah Musa
The Vice President of the Sudanese Sovereignty Council, Malik Agar, delivered a significant speech to the Sudanese nation on Sunday evening. He presented a comprehensive vision for post-war Sudan, addressing the country’s political, economic, and military dimensions and outlining a roadmap for establishing a new Sudanese state based on inclusivity and diversity, free from hatred.
Victory is Near
In his speech, Agar stated that the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia is attempting to loot Sudan’s wealth, emphasizing that Sudan has faced conspiracies by opportunists who have deviated from the revolution’s path. He noted that some individuals chose to serve foreign agendas aimed at destroying their country. Agar declared that victory is imminent, especially following the liberation of Wad Madani in Al-Jazirah State. He warned those involved in spilling Sudanese blood that they would face the same fate as their rebel leader, Hemeti, and asserted that the transition to democracy requires the full liberation of all parts of the country.
Political Transition
Agar emphasized that the Sudanese army remains committed to the political transition for which the revolutionaries sacrificed their blood. He accused the rebels of implementing a premeditated plan to fragment and divide Sudan. He stressed that the army would not allow any internal or external forces to sow discord among the Sudanese people. Agar acknowledged the lack of equality in Sudan’s current state and expressed the army’s commitment to addressing these issues. He urged proponents of political Islam to learn from the 30-year rule’s failures while calling for dialogue to establish a new Sudan. Agar insisted on the need for consensual legitimacy to transition to constitutional legitimacy and maintained that the army would reject any reconciliation initiative that compromises Sudan’s sovereignty. He also urged political parties to play their roles effectively and adjust their stances.
Timing Significance
Agar’s speech coincided with the army’s victory and its entry into Wad Madani on Saturday, leading experts to label it a “victory speech.” The speech highlighted the state’s post-war plan and government achievements, including currency reforms and success in managing the high school examination challenges. These developments sparked questions about whether the war was nearing its end and how Agar’s proposed political and post-war foundations could be accepted.
Reservations About the Speech
Some political forces in Sudan expressed reservations about Agar’s speech, criticizing it as premature for discussing achievements. Several political leaders, who preferred anonymity, told The Investigator that they had expected the speech to focus on the victory in Madani and boost troop morale for further city liberations. They described the address as a generalized progress report, questioning Agar’s authority to articulate a state vision. They viewed Agar as representing a specific faction, which could lead to sensitivities with other political forces in the country.
State Vision
Motasim Al-Fahal, the political secretary of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), regarded Agar’s speech as reasonable and reflective of Sudan’s state vision. Al-Fahal affirmed his party’s commitment to a civilian democratic transition and accountability for crimes committed against the Sudanese people. He called for justice to take its course without exclusion and urged tolerance and unity. Al-Fahal considered the speech timely, noting the government’s achievements during wartime and its handling of crises. He described the liberation of Madani as a major sign of hope and emphasized the unity between the army and the people in this national battle.
Consensus Viewpoints
Journalist and political analyst Maki Al-Maghrabi highlighted consensus points, noting that Sudan’s decision-making is no longer unilateral. He argued that Agar’s speech, alongside the stances of other leaders, reflects a unified vision and shared approach, despite differences in tone or focus. Al-Maghrabi suggested that Agar’s remarks on political Islam served as constructive criticism and an assurance that no single faction could monopolize Sudan’s future. He emphasized that Agar’s speech was directed at international audiences rather than domestic ones, as internal dynamics have already been resolved. He concluded that Agar’s speech aligns fully with the state’s vision and strategy.