The Battle of Dignity and Agriculture

By Dr. Hassan Issa Al-Talib

Farmers engaged in mechanized rain-fed agriculture in Gedaref State and neighboring areas are complaining about the exorbitant cost of diesel fuel needed to operate their machinery, with the price of a single barrel now exceeding SDG 2 million. This comes amid widespread reports that the government may completely withdraw its support for farmers—a troubling and unprecedented development.

For more than fifty years, successive Sudanese governments have supported the agricultural sector and encouraged production. This is hardly unique to Sudan; it is standard practice among responsible nations. The European Union, for example, has allocated €368 billion in agricultural support, while even the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, known for its free-market approach, provided approximately $44 billion in aid to American farmers.

Sudanese farmers, however, are being denied similar support under the banner of economic liberalization and the uncritical adoption of imported economic theories. This reflects a misunderstanding of the principles and objectives of liberalization and constitutes an irresponsible abandonment of a vital pillar of national security. A nation that cannot feed itself cannot fully safeguard its sovereignty or political independence.

Agriculture accounts for roughly 60 percent of Sudan’s national income and government revenues, while employing more than 60 percent of the country’s workforce. Food security is a cornerstone of social stability, enabling people to remain in their communities while providing employment opportunities for hundreds of thousands of workers displaced from factories destroyed during the war, as well as those forced to flee occupied or abandoned villages.

Withdrawing state support from this strategic productive sector—the principal contributor to the public treasury and the country’s largest employer—under such extraordinary circumstances would deal a severe blow to Sudan’s cohesion. It would threaten next year’s food supply, jeopardize the rainy season harvest, reduce export opportunities, weaken livestock production, diminish employment, and deprive the state of valuable economic and commercial gains.

The current situation resembles that of a lone traveler in the desert who mistakes a mirage for water, empties his containers in pursuit of it, and only realizes his mistake when it is too late. Regret then serves no purpose.

Decision-makers, and indeed all Sudanese, should remember that one of the principal causes of the 1889 famine (1306 AH) was the abandonment of agriculture. Farmers left their land, agricultural production collapsed, the state weakened, and its leaders ultimately fell.

One of the key reasons why the rebel militia has failed to gain public acceptance, despite its rebellion against the constitutional army, is that the overwhelming majority of Sudanese—particularly in the country’s agricultural and production regions—have stood behind what supporters call the Battle of Dignity, providing manpower and logistical support despite the systematic destruction of agricultural infrastructure in Gezira, Sennar, Kordofan, and Darfur, and the displacement of countless farming communities.

Against this backdrop, the government’s failure to support farmers and its neglect of this vital strategic sector, without considering the potentially grave consequences, represents what the author describes as a profound administrative and moral misjudgment, political failure, and strategic blindness. Food security, he argues, is no less important than national defense, as food itself is a weapon in wartime and “armies march on their stomachs.”

The author further argues that starvation is being used as a weapon in the ongoing conflict, alongside coordinated media campaigns emphasizing famine and calls for foreign intervention. He contends that these narratives are amplified through certain humanitarian platforms and some United Nations agencies, which he believes have aligned themselves with harmful external agendas.

Sudan, he writes, needs to produce at least nine million tons of sorghum and other grains annually to ensure food security, avoid dependence on international aid, and preserve the nation’s dignity. Achieving this, he argues, requires sustained government support and guaranteed supplies of diesel fuel for farmers.

Given the narrow planting window during the rainy season, the author calls on the Chairman and members of the Transitional Sovereignty Council to intervene immediately to reverse what he describes as a grave strategic mistake. He concludes by warning that failure to act would leave them condemned by history, adding that the state must avoid making what he considers a fatal strategic error.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=15437