The road to a responsible national dialogue

Although the ruling party describes its struggle against its opponents and those who disagree with it as a religious crusade, the fact is that it has always been about politics, and the evidence for this is provided by the different views of parties which share a similar Islamic agenda, needless to mention the emergence of reform groups within the ruling party itself!

The political facts on the ground indicate that these parties, as expected, are competing in the political arena, and that their exploitation of religion in politics and the positions of their bases are quite different.

 We are witnessing a political struggle whose core programs are based more on political rather than religious considerations. These include good governance, democracy, development, peace, the rule of law and peaceful sharing of power.

These are not difference over religion, and that is the core of the present dispute and the cause of the political impasse and tension.

These political issues concern all Sudanese, and we should read the current political tension in the light of these facts because a correct reading of the situation will enable us to deal with it properly.

 Developments in any country are influenced by both internal and external factors and events. Sudan is now facing crises on the domestic and regional levels that reflect on overall developments in the country.

Domestically, the secession of the South requires serious national dialogue to deal with the new reality.

The first lesson to learn from the split by South Sudan is that we failed to manage Sudanese diversity. The separation of the South also alerts us to the fact that we are threatened with more disintegration if we do not learn the lesson by recognizing diversity through a comprehensive national program that realizes unity in diversity, establishes guided governance on the basis of justice, equity, sustainable development and peaceful circulation of power, eradicates corruption, bribery and nepotism and deals with all on equal footing as citizens. If we fail to do this, the country will remain threatened by war and splintering.

Nobody should be led into the belief that the breakaway of the South will mean the end of plurality in Sudan and that religious unity will prevent internal struggle. Darfur sent the clear message that secular struggle supersedes all else, considering that the people of Darfur are all Muslims who carried arms against a government that rules in the name of Islam, and that their activities were led by previous members of the ruling Islamic movement.

We are clearly facing new realities, demands and proposals. Consequently, the ongoing dialogue should not be held for the purpose of swaying some opposition parties to occupy seats in power or procure posts.

What is required now is a project for guided national rule in every sense of the word. This project should be accepted by grassroots and not by political leaders because the local, regional and even international scene has changed. Eruptions are no longer spearheaded by opposition parties that have been besieged for years. They should rather be led by youthful cadres from outside the political structure, because matters have transcended the old framework, institutions and goals.

That is the external influence we referred to earlier. The Sudanese crisis cannot be addressed without taking that influence into account.