posted 19 June 2005 09:01 AM            

Related:


· Printer-friendly version

· About the author

· Endnotes

· Peace Is in the Details: No Story Is Too Small

· Genocide and the Possibility of Truthful Politics

· Adventure in Asmara:
A Report on the Sudanese Resistance


Sudan: What "Comprehensive" Peace Really Requires

By Mekael Teshome
April 15, 2005

The opinions expressed in the following article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute for Global Engagement.

A "Comprehensive Peace Agreement" was signed on 9 January 2005 between the southern based Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement (SPLM), led by John Garang, and the northern based Government of Sudan (GoS), led by President Omar al-Bashir, opening a new chapter for Sudan. The agreement formally ends Africa's longest running civil war — a war that has cost the lives of 1.5 million people and displaced another four million. In a country that has known only 11 years of peace and 38 years of war since its independence in 1956, there is a renewed spirit of optimism in the air. It raises the question, however, of whether the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) will really be comprehensive enough to bring about a lasting peace.

The CPA makes provisions concerning a wide variety of issues between the GoS and the SPLM, including the integration of armed forces, the sharing of oil wealth, the sharing of administrative positions, and the status of Shari'a in the south. The Agreement also grants the south autonomy for six years before a referendum vote will be held to determine if the south will secede. Unfortunately, this formula is more a time bomb than a comprehensive peace, for there are many stakeholders in Sudan's future other than the GoS and SPLM. A genuinely lasting peace must be built on a new inclusive nationalism than includes Sudan's full richness of diversity.

The Sources of Civil War(s)

Before evaluating the CPA in these respects, a brief look at the historical development of the clash between the northern based government and the southern based rebels is germane. Sudan was a collection of small independent states until 1820-21 when Egypt conquered and unified the northern part of the country. For most of the 1800s, Egypt laid claim to the entire country of Sudan, though only establishing effective control of the northern portion.

The history of modern Sudan begins in 1881 when Muhammad Ahmed ibn Abdalla, known as the "Mahdi" or "expected one," began to convert ethnic groups in western and central Sudan to Islam. The Mahdi and his "Ansars" (followers) led a revolt against the Egyptians and captured Khartoum in 1885. Their victory, however, was short-lived. Three years later, the Egyptians returned with British support and overwhelmed the Sudanese government. In 1899, Sudan was proclaimed a condominium1 under Anglo-Egyptian administration. Though independence was only brief and by this point the Mahdi was dead, the seeds of nationalism had been sown.

Southern Sudan and northern Sudan have always been different, and these differences were greatly exacerbated by the condominium government and traditional British divide-and-rule policies. The British policy of indirect rule prevented any real political integration of the north and the south. The British sought to modernize Sudan by applying European technology to its underdeveloped economy. However, southern Sudan, especially the provinces of Equatoria, Bahr al Ghazal, and Upper Nile, garnered little attention until after WWI. To justify this policy of separation, the British claimed that the south was not ready to be exposed to the modern world. Consequently, while the south remained isolated and developed along indigenous lines, the north was exposed to development.

Unlike their Egyptian predecessors, the British were able to consolidate control over southern Sudan. However, they completely detached the south from the north. Northern Sudanese were barred from entering the south and Arab administrators and merchants from the north were expelled from the south. While the British discouraged the spread of Islam and Arab culture to the south, they made efforts to revitalize African customs and traditional life that had been disrupted by the slave trade.

In terms of the religious topography of modern Sudan, there is a clear divide between Muslims and Christians. During the condominium government, Christian missionaries were active in the south running churches, hospitals, and schools. They did not have much influence in the heavily Muslim north. Also, because mission graduates tended to gain posts in the provincial civil service and receive higher training in British East Africa rather than Khartoum, many northerners viewed them as tools of British imperialism. This only served to exacerbate the north-south division.

When nationalism emerged in Sudan in the 1930s, it was a predominantly Arab and Muslim phenomenon and largely based its support in the northern provinces. These nationalists advocated a centralized government in Khartoum. The nationalists also resented Britain's colonial policies in the South, seeing them as a stumbling block in the unification and Arabization of Sudan.

When northern Sudan imposed Islam and Arabic upon the diverse people of Sudan after independence, the south saw it as Arab imperialism. When the Arab-led government reneged on promises to southerners to create a federal system, Sudan's first civil war (1955 -1972) was launched by a mutiny of southern army officers.

During this time, the Sudanese government experienced three coup d'etats and a series of governments which could not resolve the war. Finally, in 1972 the government of former President Nimeiri was able to sign the Addis Ababa Agreement with the Anya Nya rebels and grant southern Sudan regional autonomy.

However, President Nimeiri eroded the gains from the agreement with his policy of Islamization and Arabization of the country, symbolized by the imposition of Shari' a law in 1983. In June of that same year, Nimeiri abrogated the Agreement altogether when he divided the south into three separate regions and attempted to annex the newly discovered oil fields in the South. It was in response to Nimeiri's actions that the SPLM was formed and the second civil war began in 1983.

Who's Missing from the "Comprehensive" Agreement?

In light of Sudan's colonial history and the failed Addis Ababa Agreement, there is reason to be skeptical that the CPA will not result in a lasting peace. In retrospect, the Addis Ababa Agreement's ultimate failure was the fact that it neither satisfied the southerners' desire for power parity with the north, nor did it grant them self-determination. Although the CPA, if enforced, will satisfy the south's desire for more autonomy or total independence, it neglects the other conflicts around the country that are based, more or less, on the same argument: the GoS has centralized power and excluded groups in the periphery from the political process and from development efforts.

Recently, for instance, the conflict in Darfur (which means "land of the Fur") has come to the forefront of the American public's attention. Unlike the civil war, the conflict here is not between Christian and Animist blacks and Muslim Arabs; the Darfur conflict is between black Muslims and Arab Muslims. Since early 2003, the Sudan Liberation Army and the Justice and Equality Movement have been attacking government targets and claiming that Khartoum has neglected the region and oppressed black Africans in favor of Arabs. For many years there has been tension in Darfur over land and grazing rights between the mostly nomadic Arabs and farmers from the Fur, Massaleet, and Zagawa communities. The government admits mobilizing "self-defense militias" following rebel attacks, but denies any links to the Janjaweed, the group accused of trying to "cleanse" the territory of black Africans. So far, it is estimated that about 380,000 people have been killed in this conflict.

In addition to the genocide in Darfur, there are also smaller ongoing conflicts between the GoS and peripheral rebel groups. The Beja people in northeastern Sudan are an example. On 29 January 2005, some 29 people died in a clash between supporters of the Beja Congress (BC) and Government security forces. The BC was founded in 1960 to address the needs of the Beja people, who have long complained that the GoS has neglected to address critical development issues in the region. The BC forged an alliance with the Darfur based Sudan Liberation Movement in January of last year. The BC was excluded from the talks that produced the CPA.

The Way Forward: A Pluralistic National Identity

In light of the civil war itself, the CPA looks like a strategic victory. However, in light of Sudan's overall political condition, it seems like nothing more than a tactical improvement. The CPA is an agreement between two minorities; many groups have been excluded from the peace process. While addressing the needs of the SPLM, the CPA does not address the needs of other rebel groups with similar demands such as the Sudan People's Democratic Front, the Sudan People's Defense Force, the South Sudan Liberation Movement and the Sudan Liberation Army. In addition, there are ethnic and tribal rivalries within the SPLM due to the fact that it is dominated by ethnic Dinka. There are also other southern groups in opposition to the SPLM which have grown in recent years and are supported by intellectuals and politicians both inside and outside Sudan.

The GoS is treating these other periphery concerns as security problems whereas they really are politico-economic. They go to the very root of national identity. Sudan is a very large and diverse country with 90 different cultural groups and many additional different tribal groups such as the Beja, Jamala and Nubian people in the north, and the Azande, Dinka, Nuer and Shilluk people in the south. Moreover, there is even religious diversity in the South. Roman Catholic, Anglican, Coptic, and Greek Orthodox are just a few of the varieties of Christianity in the South, not to mention the diversity of indigenous religions. All of these groups have one aspiration in common: to have a platform to address their concerns and to have a role in the development of Sudan. By defining only two parameters for its national identity, Arab and Muslim, the GoS has ignored Sudan's true identity, which is multiethnic, multicultural, and multi-religious. The attempt to forge an untrue identity out of Sudan came at the expense of millions of lives.

The future of any peaceful resolution to Sudan's conflicts rests in the GoS's ability to move away from its false two-dimensional identity and embrace Sudan's true identity: an ancient land whose true beauty is found in its rich and diverse people.

my comment-nubians do not live only in the north but many do,and many lived in central sudan,now the central part is part of the north because of the civil war.borders or regions always change.central sudan is really a region in sudan and should not be just apart of the north.

posted 20 June 2005 10:39 PM            

i want to you to enlighten me on the issue on beja people,are they black africans and what is the relationship between the arab and beja.

looking at the beja people,they seam to look like somalis.do they look down the beja people juslike they do southerners,because if they do i think somalia should not show any repect to the rabs in sudans.

posted 21 June 2005 08:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by cush:
beja people are probably the most hadsome and good loking people in sudan..correct me if i am wrong.how dare did the arabs who probably who probably have less arab blood than beja tried to ignore the beja people.
i suppose it is some thing to do with beja people not accepting arab as their ethnicity!.

some one told me that there is tribe in beja who are descedant of prophet mohamed s.a.w, so why the so called arab government treatin them with respect..strang what people do "under arab identity".

---

greeks,romans and arabs always said that the nubians were the most handsome in the sudan and on average in the world in ancient times and early medieval times.when arabs started traveling to other areas of africa like mali they mention that mandingo or mande women were one of best looking too and some others in west africa on average.keep in mind we are talking about average because you could find alot of women who are a 8, 9 10 and 10 + and many and i dare say all groups in africa and in the world but some groups just have more 9 and 10/10+ looking women that others.of course the only extreme 10+'s i have seen only are black women, period.

don't get me wrong i seen women of other races who could go up to a 10.6 but they tend to have more of a black type look.
black women now from what i have seen in all regions of the earth that are super,super gooding looking seem to go up to a 10.9,the highest score on the ladder.
of course you could find other african folks that on average that are like that in other regions in africa,like in west africa, etc etc.let's not forget that hausa women too are basically on that list and some live in the sudan and some other west africans.

beja are black and others are brown but i believe most are black an not all have arab blood but alot do i believe.
the beja in the past in ancient times were nubians called the medja and they did not have or most of the them to all of them the further you go back did not have any mixture.

posted 22 June 2005 06:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by cush:
very intresting,thnks for that.

i want to you to enlighten me on the issue on beja people,are they black africans and what is the relationship between the arab and beja.

looking at the beja people,they seam to look like somalis.do they look down the beja people juslike they do southerners,because if they do i think somalia should not show any repect to the rabs in sudans.

the beja people seam to have arab blood,but i may be wrong.because the quiet handsome people.
so what is the statue for the beja people in sudan.

---