The Strategic Symbolism of ٌRecapturing the Republican Palace

Osman Jalaluddin
(1)
The strategic depth of the operation to cleanse the Republican Palace and central Khartoum from the filth of the mercenaries of the Dagalo family lies in the restoration of the buildings and meanings of the state of 1956. Those who speak without knowledge fail to recognize that the essence of the state of ’56 is the fruit of the struggles of the sons of Sudan, with all their religious, identity, and ethnic distinctions. This began with the historical dualities between Amara Dunqas of the Funj and Abdullah Muhammad al-Baqir, nicknamed Jama’, descended from the Arab Qawasim, which gave rise to the Blue Sultanate in 1504. It continued with the duality of Ahmed al-Ma’qur from the Banu Hilal, who came from Granada, and Sultan Kira Shaurdorshit, which led to the transformation of the Sultanate of Darfur from paganism to Islam during the reign of Suleiman Solong. It also included the duality of Muhammad al-Ja’ali and Kirkit, which resulted in the Islamic Kingdom of Taqali, and the duality of Imam Muhammad Ahmad al-Mahdi and Abdullah al-Ta’ishi, which laid the foundation for the Sudanese state.
(2)
The struggles of the sons of Sudan continued with the same genius diversity during the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium period, starting with the revolution of Abdul Qadir and Dhabouba in central Sudan in 1907, the revolution of Faki Najmuddin in Sennar, the revolution of Sultan Ali al-Mirawi and Sultan Ajbana in the Nuba Mountains, the revolts of the Dinka, Shilluk, and Nuer in the south, and the resistance of Sultan Ali Dinar and the revolution of Faki al-Sahini in Darfur.
The struggle against the Condominium continued through soft tools with the same genius diversity, beginning with the Sudanese Union Society in 1922, which evolved into the White Flag League in 1924, led by the hero Ali Abd al-Latif al-Dinka, who led a peaceful revolution that later turned into an armed clash against colonialism, ultimately ending in the movement’s suppression.
Then, the enlightened vanguard, with the same diversity, convened in the Graduates’ Congress of 1938, leading the struggle against colonialism through intellectual, political, and cultural tools until the achievement of the Self-Government Parliament in 1953. In its historic session on December 19, 1955, the parliament declared independence, with the proposal presented by Abdul Rahman Dabaka, representative of the Umma Party from Nyala, and seconded by Mashawir Juma Sahl, representative of the National Unionist Party from Dar Hamid. The flag of independence was raised at the mast of the Republican Palace by Prime Minister Ismail al-Azhari and opposition leader Muhammad Ahmad Mahjoub.
(3)
Thus, the genius of diversity continued in the cycles of national governance in the post-independence era, whether in parliamentary systems (the duality of government and opposition) or authoritarian regimes (the diversity within the three military councils of Abboud, Nimeiri, and al-Bashir). The genius of diversity and nationalism in the national military institution laid the groundwork for the army’s alignment with the people’s revolutions in October 1964, April 1985, and December 2018. Even the armed movements of the margins that emerged in 1963 in the south and later in Darfur in 2003 were characterized by a degree of diversity, rationality, and Sudanese ethics.
Despite the curves and deviations along the path, this creative historical exhaustion and the genius of dualities and diversity will inevitably culminate in a historic national resurgence, yielding a sustainable democratic national project that delights the observers.
(4)
However, the strategic question is: Does the duality project of Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemeti) and Abdel Rahim Dagalo serve the cause of national building and sustainable democracy in Sudan?
The project of the Dagalo family represents a radical break with the issues of national building and democracy because it seeks to reduce governance in Sudan to a hereditary kingdom of the Dagalo family, passed down from generation to generation. The ancient Islamic kingdoms derived their legitimacy and continuity in governance from their dedication to serving society. The foundations of the Umayyad state were built on the jurisprudence of coexistence and mutual support, with their slogan being, “We will not stand between the people and their tongues as long as they do not stand between us and our authority,” as expressed by the founding father of the state, Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan. However, the Dagalo family’s project follows Machiavelli’s dictum: “He who builds on the people builds on mud.” This is evident in the heinous violations of private and public property and the violation of the dignity and pride of the Sudanese people, surpassing even Machiavelli’s imagination, the father of opportunism, who advised despotic princes, saying: “Killing citizens is not a virtue, and deceiving friends and losing the values of mercy and religion may bring you power but not glory.”
The danger of the Dagalo family’s project lies in its Nazi-like implications, which enshrine ethnic and genealogical exclusivity in governance, treating the Mahariya as masters and other Sudanese ethnicities as mere enslaved people and followers.
(5)
Among the good tidings is that the Battle of Dignity will be the last of Sudan’s wars. For the first time, the will of Sudanese society aligns with the will of the army and the government to confront an existential threat to the survival of the Sudanese state. Indeed, the will of society preceded that of the government in mobilization and rallying to military bases to fight side by side with the army. The will of society continues to lead the government in reconstruction, development, and service provision in villages and cities liberated from the thugs of the terrorist militia.
This war will end with the eradication of the terrorist militia, and with it will end the cycles of imbalance that have characterized governance in the post-independence era, which entrenched the dominance of state institutions over societal institutions. The will and dominance of Sudanese societal institutions will be realized in the issues of national building and sustainable democratic transformation, as well as the making of a civilizational renaissance in all its intellectual, cognitive, political, cultural, and economic dimensions. And often, harm brings a benefit.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=4787