Sudan and the vanishing dream of ‘democracy’

For several weeks now, Sudan has been in the news.

At the beginning, the talk was that the demonstrations in Khartoum and other cities were about the rising cost of bread and fuel. The international news media daily carried reports of crowds camping out in the streets, insisting that their President, Omar Al-Bashir, must go. Many in the crowd, it was usually noted from the television footage, were women, their heads modestly clad in Islamic head-wear.

Al-Bashir was a man who had long had an international reputation for infamy. He came to power as a Brigadier in a military coup in 1989, when he deposed the sitting government of Prime Minister Sadiq al-Mahdi. He placed himself at the head of a ‘Transitional’Military Government.

Al-Bashir would go on to stay in the saddle of political power for all of three decades, becoming one of the longest serving leaders in the African and Arab worlds. He would win three Presidential elections. He would rule Sudan with an iron grip.

His alliance with the late radical Islamist Hassan Al Turabi led him to introduce Sharia law in the country. He had a long-running romance with notable international terrorists. This relationship would, along the way, acquire for Sudan a designation from the United States government as a ‘State Sponsor of Terrorism’. At various times his government would harbour Osama bin Laden and Carlos the Jackal, the legendary French terrorist. There was a suspicion that the country was being used not only as a haven for jihadists but also as a repository for ‘weapons of mass destruction’. This led President Bill Clinton at a time to launch cruise missiles at a Khartoum location that later turned out to be a factory owned by the Al-Shifa Pharmaceutical company.

With his own people, Al-Bashir was relentlessly ruthless. Sudan was embroiled in long-running armed conflicts with secessionist rebels in the Darfur region, as well as in the oil-rich South of the country. Sudanese troops and paramilitary forces terrorized the ‘rebel’ areas. They unleashed mayhem, carrying out widespread massacres, murder and rapine. Despite official government denials, verifiable evidence of these atrocities reached international attention. In 2009, Omar Al-Bashir became the first sitting President to be indicted by the International Criminal Court. He was charged with direct responsibility for mass killing, rape and plunder against civilians in Darfur. The Court declared him a ‘war criminal’ and directed that he should be arrested anywhere he set his foot internationally.

The directive to arrest the President of an African country created a furor that was troubling at different levels. Many leaders who secretly despised Al-Bashir for his behavior pronounced themselves outraged, seeing it as an insult to the African continent. Long after Al-Bashir was meant to have been arrested and conveyed to The Hague to face trial,the President was able to travel widely, attending events in Saudi Arabia, China, Kenya, South Africa, and even Nigeria.

Many who watched the recent Khartoum street demonstrations, led by the unusual sight of women, must have thought initially that, between the familiar Al-Bashir cocktail of brutal Police and ‘take-no-prisoners’ Rapid Security Force (RSF), the hapless women would quickly be driven off the streets. Al Bashir even declared a State of Emergency and restricted the internet.

Unexpectedly, after several weeks of stalemate, the President was overthrown in a military coup.

There was widespread celebration in the country. The soldiers were hailed as liberators.

It looked as if ‘democracy’ was just around the corner.

Just to be sure, the women stayed on the streets, insisting that the Army had to hand over to a civilian government.

Negotiations went back and forth.

The celebration proved premature.

A few days ago, the ‘Interim Government’ bared its fangs. The RSF was unleashed on the crowd gathered in front of the military headquarters, and elsewhere, in all its brutality. A hundred – probably more, demonstrators were shot dead.

The streets of Khartoum have been cleared of demonstrators as we speak. ‘Law and Order’ has been restored in the Sudan. Demonstrators, many with gunshot injuries, are licking their wounds.

The Sudanese crisis is like a depressing replay of the Arab Spring in Egypt. A dictator is dislodged by popular protest. There is jubilation. The dictator is replaced by an even harsher dictator. The scenario of Hosni Mubarak, and the advent of Abdel Fattahel-Sisi, all over again.

But why?

It is necessary to know Sudan’s past to understand its present predicament. The country is the meeting point and battle line of the clash of cultures and civilizations between Black Africa and the Arab world. It is a repository of a rich Nubia civilization going back thousands of years to pre-Islamic times that is regularly denied, because of what it says about Black Civilization.Today it lies geographically in the middle of a raging power struggle in the Middle East, involving the coalition led by Mohamed bin Salman, the Saudi prince, against the Iranians and their supporters and proxies. Intertwined is the existential struggle of the endangered monarchies to eliminate ‘political Islam’ before it eliminates them.

There is a real fear that if ‘Democracy’ is allowed to happen in Sudan, the ruling party, strongly influenced by religious radicals, in the mould of Mohammed Morsi of Egypt, whose sad death occurred recently, will win the elections. For some people, that cannot be allowed to happen.

It appears the plug is being pulled on ‘Democracy’. This is probably responsible for the volte-face of the Army, one day embracing the women on the streets, the next day shooting them down. The leader of the ‘Interim Government’ in Khartoum is said to have received generous financial aid from MBS and the Arab Emirates.

Have the Sudanese merely jumped ‘from the frying pan into the fire’, in their eagerness to live in a free, democratic society?

The next few days will tell.

 Femi Olugbile