Problem of Sudan

The basic problem of the Sudan is that its reality, both in its historical perspective and in its contemporary context conflicts fundamentally with the policies that have been pursued by the various governments, whether military or Islamic dictatorships or based on multi-partism , that have come and gone in Khartoum since independence in 1956. What characterises the Sudan is its rich diversity in its history, geography, people and culture.

The historical background in Section I, above, shows the diversity and richness of Sudanese history and the present reality. We have presented glimpses of the Sudan from Biblical times, Christian kingdoms, Islamic Arab invasion and establishment of to its present identity. We refer to this character of our country as “historical diversity”. This reality of history must e reflected in our present attempts to resolve the issue of civil war in the Sudan. This historical outlook has always been reflected in the political struggle by the SPLM/SPLA since its establishment in 1983 to the present.

The second diversity is the “contemporary diversity” of the Sudan which consist mainly of ethnicity and religion. Ethnicity basically defines two groups in the Sudan, the African and the Arab nationalities. The fact that colonialism encouraged the dichotomy of an African Christian/animist South and Arab arabicized Moslem North has added to more diversity and mistrust among all Sudanese and added to the complex situation in the Sudan.

The last reliable (non-political) census was conducted by the colonial authorities just before their disengagement from the Sudan in 1956. That independent census showed the demographic breakdown of the Sudan as 31% Arab, 61% African, and 8% others. The 8% others were mostly West Africans who got stranded in the Sudan on their way to or from pilgrimage in Mecca. Therefore ethnically, 69% of the population is African Sudanese and in the majority while 31% is Arab Sudanese, and a minority. And within each of these two broad groupings of Africans and Arabs, there are many different tribes. Generally there are more than 500 different ethnic groups in the Sudan speaking more than 100 different and distinct languages.

Hence while the northern Sudan may be predominantly muslim (perhaps 65%), it is certainly not predominantly Arab. Religion is the other component of Sudan’s contemporary diversity. We have Moslems, we have Christians, and we have those who believe in their ancestral African religions.

The real situation is that the Sudan is characterised by these two diversities, “historical diversity” and “contemporary diversity” But this reality has been ignored, swept aside, by all governments that have come and gone in Khartoum since independence. Instead of using the historical and contemporary diversities to evolve a Sudanese commonality a Sudanese commonwealth to which all Sudanese pledge undivided loyalty and allegiance irrespective of their race or tribe irrespective of their religion and irrespective of gender, all the governments of post-colonial Sudan have emphasised on only two parameters of our reality Arabism and Islamism.

This is the central problem of the Sudan; the Sudanese state is essentially an alien political system with a institutional framework that excludes the vast majority of its citizens. The African Sudanese have been excluded from the centre of state power since 1956 while they constitute 69% of the population! How can there be peace? And after the 1989 NIF coup the system further excluded non-fundamentalist moslems, while women have always been excluded at all times. We call this political dispensation the “Old Sudan” based on religion (Islam) and race (Arabism). Some analysts have described the problem of Sudan as “Double Apartheid” or racial and religious apartheid.

The present National Isalamic Front (NIF) government is the culmination of the policies of the Khartoum-based governments that have come and gone since independence. In 1989 the Old Sudan split in two the “NIF” Sudan of the Fundamentalist National Islamic Front (NIF) of Dr. Hassan al-Turabi, and the “Old Sudan” of the traditional parties that had ruled the Sudan since 1956.

When the SPLM/SPLA was formed in 1983, the movement critically analysed the Sudanese reality, and came to the conclusion that it must struggle for a united Sudan; but a unity on a new basis a Sudan that is pluralistic, democratic and secular, a new Sudanese political dispensation that is based on the realities of the Sudan, on both our historical and contemporary diversities. We call this new political dispensation the New Sudan, as opposed to the NIF Sudan and the Old Sudan both of which between them have cost the country 30 years of war out of 40 years of its formal independence.

In summary the present situation in Sudan is characterised by the concurrent existence of three Sudans: The NIF Sudan, the Old Sudan and the New Sudan all competing for determination of the identity and future of the Sudan.