Sudan on the Threshold of a Non-Conventional Transition: From the Land of Renewed Wars to Sustainable Peace
By Abdullah Rizq Abu Seemazah
It can be assumed that the Khartoum 23 war marks a turning point between two eras in modern Sudans history: pre-war and post-war, each with its own characteristics and dynamics. War is an exceptional reality, a violent upheaval in the natural course of development, uprooting Sudanese society from its roots. It is not a minor event like the October 25th coup, which could be described as changing the walking stick. Therefore, it created a new reality that deepened the existing national crisis to the extent that partial solutions, reforms, and superficial settlements are no longer suitable to address the new challenges posed by the wars reality.
War, as a manifestation of violence associated with power, appears to be akin to what is often described as giving birth to an old society that begets a new one.
One of the most significant changes resulting from this transformation is the concept of transition. Its a traditional political thinking pattern, a repository of historical experience, programs, tactics, and forces associated with transitional approaches. However, the revolution, due to the changes brought about by the war, is causing a shift away from established developmental paths created during the previous phase.
For the first time since the Turkish-Egyptian invasion of Sudan, the military institution, after a long immersion in politics and business and the complex conflicts associated with them, is facing itself in a destructive war. This war signifies a deep crisis and disintegration of the state, threatening the existence of Sudan as it tears apart and distributes power between militias and covetous states.
The war in Khartoum, with its extensions in the regions and its manifestations in all aspects of life in the country, is a harsh experience that the Sudanese society is enduring for the first time. It profoundly affects them, allowing us to conclude that post-war Sudanese society is not the same as the one before the war, in terms of its composition, aspirations, and visions. As it occurred in the heart of the country, in contrast to peripheral Sudanese wars, its effects, albeit varying in intensity, have touched everyone, changing them forever. Therefore, it is not expected that all conditions will return to what they were at any point before April 15, 2023, simply by laying down arms. War, with the associated forced change, obliges everyone to rethink their approaches in light of new developments in various fields, including politics, economics, society, culture, and more.
At a time when the war has created a new division of powers based on ones position regarding the war itself, questions arise about the usefulness of existing alliances before the war and the integrity of their political foundations, tactics, and programs. Removing the traces of war becomes a priority and a headline for the stage and its key issues, starting with comprehensive reforms to repair what the war has damaged and rebuilding everything it has destroyed in every aspect. This transition should lead to civilian rule under a democratic system. It should also entail uprooting the roots of the war itself, which is equivalent to achieving a great revolution, requiring a revolutionary leadership inspired by the vigor, resilience, and determination of the glorious December revolution.
What is needed now is not merely a transition from the rescue dictatorship to democracy and civilian rule but the construction of a new and different Sudan with a new program for a non-conventional transition from the land of renewed wars to sustainable peace.
