What’s going on in Sudan?
It’s 1am.
I am scrolling listlessly through Instagram when I am hit by a wave of blue: the favourite colour of 26 year old engineer Mohamed Mattar who was fatally shot in a June 3 crackdown of a protest camp whilst trying to protect two women during the bloodshed outside the military headquarters in Khartoum, Sudan. I am shaken. When I ask the elders around me why nobody is ‘screaming from the rooftops’ about Sudan- they say they are tired. They say blood has been flowing into the Nile since they were my age- and that blood will continue to flow. They tell this to me as if it is the natural order of the world. Is that why we are silent about Sudan? Are we deaf, tired, or both?
To answer this question, we will have to review Sudan’s history to understand how it culminated in this moment in time, and, along the way, review beliefs we hold about the international community and governments.
A BRIEF HISTORY
There are a few key moments in Sudan’s history that stand out to me:
- In 1874, Egypt conquered Sudan and ruled over it until 1898.
- In 1898, Britain and Egypt exercised joint rule over Sudan until 1955. During this time, it was known as Anglo-Egyptian Sudan.
- Sudan claimed independence on January 1st 1956.
- In 1986, Omar al-Bashir orchestrated a military coup which led to Hussan el-Turabi (a cleric and political leader) becoming the de-facto leader.
- In 1999, Omar al-Bashir seized power, placing Hussan el-Turabi on house arrest (he was released in 2003). He has held an iron grip for 30 years, being ousted in April of this year.
- The dawn of its isolation from the international community came with news of human rights violations, religious persecutions and allegations that Sudan was a hide out for terrorists: in 1995, the UN instituted sanctions on Sudan in an effort to quell these developments.
- By 2001, Omar al-Bashir was able to convince the UN into lifting the 6-year sanctions.
- There have been numerous attempts at peace-talks and cease-fires, most notably between the government and Sudan People’s Liberation Army (which was originally founded as a guerrilla movement against the government in 1983) in July 2002. They then agreed on joint rule for 6 years, but fighting continued on both sides throughout these peace talks.
- Just as the civil war seemed to be coming to an end, another war broke out in the north-western region of Darfur, where the Janjaweed (armed by the government) was allowed to carry out massacres that killed 200 000 to 300 000 civilians and displaced one million people.
From the above, it is clear that since independence, Sudan has been ruled by various unstable parliamentary governments and military regimes, where political power was determined chiefly by language, ethnicity and religion, with the differences between these determinants leading to unending civil war.
WHAT’S GOING ON RIGHT NOW?
On June 7th, it was reported that the Rapid Support Services (RSF-formerly known as the Janjaweed) killed 100 people in a protest. Compared to the ‘regular’ army, this militia has a reputation for brutality and cruelty, where it is led by former Janjaweed leader -Mohamed Hamdan - who was handpicked by Bashir to lead the RSF in 2013. The RSF has even been dressed in police uniforms enabling them to exercise greater control over civilian areas and inflict more harm:
- Bodies have been dumped into the Nile to hide the scale of the killings- although 40 bodies have been recovered from the river
- Doctors counted 118 people dead.
- The World Health Organisation reports that a minimum of 784 people have been wounded.
- More than 70 rapes occurred during the crackdown.
- Houses were burnt down.
- The internet is down, prompting protestors to organise protests through word of mouth and SMS.
So why is all of this happening?
Omar al-Bashir was ousted in April of this year, and replaced by a Transitional Military Council(TMC) in an attempt to transition to civilian government. Talks began to break down after it was evident that it (The TMC) had no interest in this transition, where protests then began to erupt as people organised themselves and asserted their demand for a civilian leadership. All of these occurrences are the result of continuous civil war and instability in the country caused by both international ignorance and government sponsored violence. To quote researcher Eric Reeves:
‘This is a region that could implode with all out war, a civil war that’s been made much more likely by the refusal of the international community to recognise what was represented by the uprising that began in December 19 of last year’
QUESTIONS WE NEED TO ASK OURSELVES
In my first semester of medical school, I have been taught two ways to describe a wound: superficial (a graze on the skin) and deep. It would be superficial to look at Sudan’s problems as a unique case, so I think we need to take a deeper look.
And this where we need to ask ourselves a question about the international community: are sanctions an effective means of quelling war and instability in a region? I suppose they make sense if you consider that they essentially nullify a country’s political and economic power, and to an extent, force the country to deal with its tensions so as to be re-integrated into the international community, but I think Sudan’s case shows us a darker side to this mechanism’s otherwise good intentions: it forces countries to reach short term conclusions so as to once again have access to the international market, without actually effectively quelling the root of the problem. If one considers that sanctions were once used against Sudan yet it finds itself at the brink of a second civil war- it is clear that maybe we need to think again.
Whilst you could argue that the international community should have instead resisted Omar al-Bashir’s overtures, other countries have suffered a similar fate. I do not have to look far beyond my boarders to see the neighbouring country of Zimbabwe: once hailed as Africa’s bread-basket and subjected to sanctions sometime in its history, it has ousted its ‘strong-arm’ leader (Robert Mugabe), but still faces economic and political issues that it has yet to resolve.
Whilst we have poignant questions for the international community, I think there are also some introspective questions that all governments need to ask themselves: why govern if the aim is not inspire confidence in one’s people? It is evident from Sudan’s history that there has been government complicity in the state of the country and its never-ending violence, with this story not being unique to Sudan but playing out in countries such as Rwanda and Myanmar.
TO WRAP IT UP
I once read that back in the olden days, villages used drums as a means of communication: each drum, beat with passionate intensity from the top of a hill, would relay a certain message; a certain signal, to the surrounding villages. We live in an increasingly interconnected global village: so why can’t the world hear Sudan’s drum now? I think it is because we are both deaf and tired, but this time our exhaustion has consequences: bodies will flow into the Nile, tears will flow into the Nile, and hope, that single, most fragile force, will one day flow into the Nile.
Want to help? You can sign a petition here: https://www.change.org/p/ant%C3%B3nio-guterres-the-secretary-general-of-the-united-nations-the-un-must-investigate-the-3rd-of-june-human-rights-violations-in-sudan-by-the-military?recruiter=7407336&recruited_by_id=5333dd60-f3b1-012f-8a99-4040b09128dc&share_bandit_exp=abi-15900667-en-GB&share_bandit_var=v3
