The Dialogue That Has Overwhelmed Its Own Initiator

Dr Al-Haytham Al-Kindi Yusuf

Finally, the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council has come forward to end speculation and announce the launch of a Sudanese-led national dialogue, following reports that circulated over the past few days. We have long become accustomed to this method of leaks from him, which some explain as the President floating such information as a trial balloon. The result has been a wide range of reactions from political rivals, which can help analyse the current political situation and its possible trajectories.
Although the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council did not explicitly speak of excluding the National Congress Party, or even the “Tasis” alliance, much has nevertheless been written on the subject. Yet the more important questions, which have received far less attention, concern the nature of the dialogue itself, its purpose and its desired outcomes. Why is it being called at this particular moment?
To answer these questions, we need to read the military, political and diplomatic landscape surrounding the Sudanese crisis at the domestic and regional levels.
On the one hand, strong international pressure is being exerted on the legitimate authorities to initiate a civilian political process that could lead the country towards peace and stability, ultimately paving the way for elections in which the people choose who governs them.
On the other hand, Al-Burhan wants to capitalise on the advances made on the battlefield, moving ahead of international initiatives and taking the initiative away from them in order to shape Sudan’s next political landscape in a manner that preserves the country’s sovereignty and national security, away from those external interventions that have long sought, in one form or another, to include the militia in future arrangements — something rejected by the broadest spectrum of Sudanese society.
The repercussions of the war in the Arabian Gulf have also made it necessary for Sudan to join the alliances that emerged from that conflict. Consequently, Sudan must meet certain conditions to be acceptable to those alliances, foremost among them the need for a civilian government.
This helps explain why the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council has called for the dialogue at this particular time and insisted that it take place inside the country.
As for the objectives of the dialogue, the most likely interpretation is that the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council wants to arrange the political landscape for the post-war phase, establish a new source of legitimacy for his rule, and reach political understandings over the formation of a transitional government that would reinforce the legitimacy of the arrangements to come.
Some political analysts believe that Al-Burhan wants to announce a mixed system of government in which he would serve as President of the Republic, while civilian political forces would be allowed to form and lead the government. Such an arrangement, they argue, would prevent multiple centres of decision-making and overlapping powers while clarifying responsibility.
Another expected side effect of extending the invitation to opposition civilian forces would be to divide their ranks, or at least weaken them. The dialogue has coincided with reports of preparations for a possible presidential pardon, under which legal proceedings against civilian leaders and activists would be halted. The aim would be to create an environment conducive to the return of civilian political forces to Sudan and their participation in the dialogue.
Indeed, reactions to the invitation have already diverged. While some political parties and forces have supported it as a way to avoid foreign intervention, the Sumoud Alliance has rejected it, describing it as an attempt to manage the political process unilaterally under the authority of what it sometimes calls the “war camp” and at other times the “coup forces”. This threatens the prospects of achieving the desired outcomes from the dialogue.
Even so, if the dialogue proceeds without them, Al-Burhan would have deprived them of their principal argument and portrayed them before the international community as rejecting any peaceful civilian transition. The dialogue could then proceed with whoever chooses to attend.
This, however, is not the only challenge facing Al-Burhan in pursuing his preferred course.
Convincing his fellow military members of the Sovereignty Council represents one challenge. Dealing with the parties to the Juba Peace Agreement and their entitlements presents another, and its repercussions on the battlefield would need careful calculation.
Under mounting political pressure, some members of the National Congress Party will likely oppose political exclusion if the dialogue committee bars them from participating.
Between Al-Burhan’s ambitions, Sumoud’s rejection of the dialogue, and the uncertain position of the Islamists in the next political landscape, the practical reality remains that a political breakthrough must be achieved in order to place the country in a better position.
That, however, must be conditional upon ending the rebellion and establishing foundations that address the causes of the war and ensure that it does not return.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=17007