Mohammed Al-Faki Suleiman, a leader of the Forces of Freedom and Change, in an interview with (Citizens) newspaper:
Interview - Abdulrahman Al-Ajeb
Highlights:
- I expect the Jeddah platform to return soon and a political solution has become more urgent than ever
- The Forces of Freedom and Change succeeded in defusing the crisis between Al-Burhan and Hamidti, but the remnants were quick to fire the first shot
Information has begun to be available with pictures, videos, and names about who ignited the war, and more information will become clear in the future when the war comes to an end
- The Forces of Freedom and Change is the biggest loser in this war, and its loss is national and political
- To my knowledge, Hamidti is alive
- State 56 will not continue due to its inability to represent everyone, and the new state will be founded by everyone
These days, the political arena is witnessing a major political movement, coinciding with the war that several states and cities of Sudan are experiencing. To shed light on the most prominent issues of the current political situation, the electronic newspaper (Citizens) met with Mr. Mohammed Al-Faki Suleiman, a member of the Transitional Sovereignty Council and the former Deputy Head of the Empowerment Removal Committee, and a leader in the Forces of Freedom and Change. Several questions were raised, including those related to the missing facts about the outbreak of the devastating April war, who started the war and fired the first shot? Alongside discussing the presence of a third party who fired the first shot.
We also discussed with him the accusations against the Forces of Freedom and Change of igniting the April war, supporting the Rapid Support Forces and representing its political wing. We also addressed the international and regional interventions in the war that the country is currently experiencing, and asked him about the Egyptian and Emirati roles in the April war in Sudan. We also discussed the Saudi-American initiative, the Jeddah platform, and the coldness that accompanied the platform.
We talked about the stubbornness of the Sudanese army and its insistence on militarily resolving the battle, the formation of a government, and asked him about the ongoing controversy about Hamidtis death, the decision of the Human Rights Council to establish an international fact-finding committee, and what is required to address the issue of war in Sudan. The talks about State 56 and the armys entry into the political conflict arena were present in our conversation. These and other questions were answered by our guest, Mohammed Al-Faki Suleiman, with a clear conscience and comfort, and this interview was the result of his responses.
The facts about the outbreak of the devastating April war are still missing. According to your information and as one of those close to the political kitchen, who started the war and fired the first shot?
The one who ignited the war is the primary beneficiary, and the one who has a strong desire to stop the political process that has reached its final stages. The mobilization for war was not secret, but declared, and the remnants of the former regime exploited the holy month of Ramadan and its social activities for these mobilization talks. Dozens of videos are available in the archive, and they contain threats to ignite the war and liquidate opponents. Days after the outbreak of the war, Karati said that Ramadan is a month of jihad and Ribaat, and after the war was ignited, the remnants of the former regime continued to fuel it until today. Therefore, the truth is as clear as the sun in the sky.
Okay, but before April 15, there were military movements on both sides, what are the motives for those movements?
There was continuous mobilization of forces. Both sides mentioned their motives several times in our meetings with them, and publicly after the war broke out. However, the Forces of Freedom and Change were busy with something more important than the statements of both sides, which is the ongoing work to prevent the catastrophe from happening and to reduce mobilization. This is what they succeeded in reaching practically hours before Al-Burhan and Hamidti. At that moment, the third party knew that there was no time left because the crisiss fuse would be removed, so they fired directly, and the atmosphere was ready for its extension.
The Rapid Support Forces are accused of starting the war when they besieged Marawi Airport and refused to withdraw from it. What is your response to this talk?
I certainly dont speak on behalf of anyone, and the Rapid Support Forces have a complete narrative about this event that can be examined.
There is talk about a third party that fired the first shot. According to your information, who is this party?
This is certain, and the information with pictures and names has begun to be available. More information will become clear in the future when the war comes to an end, about the forces that were stationed in Al-Baqir and those that moved from the White Nile. How the movement orders were issued. All this preliminary information, as well as the involvement of the armed Islamic movement militias from the first minute of the war. All this is documented in video, and certainly, it did not happen by chance, but according to a long and precise plan.
The remnants of the former regime have been accusing the Forces of Freedom and Change of igniting the April war. How do you respond to this accusation?
The strength of the Forces of Freedom and Change lies in its civil work, and the war has deprived it of much of its political effectiveness derived from its presence among its masses. Moreover, it created a political agreement with a wide range of actors in civil society, unions, and armed movements, and opened long and exhausting discussions with resistance committees that lasted for months. It was one step away from reaping the results of this work that extended for a whole year, and thus it is the biggest loser from the war in both national and political terms.
What is your response to the accusation that the Forces of Freedom and Change support the Rapid Support Forces and represent its political wing?
This is a falsehood launched by the remnants, taking advantage of the war atmosphere to settle their accounts with the Forces of Freedom and Change. Their enmity with the Forces of Freedom and Change is genuine, and their enmity with the Rapid Support Forces is because they did not agree with them to withdraw support from the previous regime and share power between them.
There is talk about international and regional interventions in the war that the country is experiencing. What is your comment on this?
Sudan is a pivotal country, with a distinctive geopolitical position in the heart of a politically complex region, and surrounded by several influential countries. Therefore, the more dangerous than intervention is the blatant expansion of this intervention if it continues. The solution is to go directly to stop the war and engage in the political process leading to the transfer of power to civilians.
The Saudi-American initiative has been somewhat cold. In your opinion, what are the reasons for this coldness?
The solution always comes from within, not from outside. The Saudi-American initiative is a facilitator, but if the will is not available, it will not bear fruit. As you know, some voices are still working on mobilization and insisting on a military decision, but the anti-war front is continuously expanding, and this will allow the initiative to exert pressure on those who work to continue the war. We expect the return of the Jeddah platform soon because the political solution has become more urgent than ever.
Okay, do you think that the Jeddah platform is qualified to address the issue of war in Sudan?
It is the most appropriate place for Saudi Arabias significant regional role, and the major political weight represented by the United States, and the two countries are allies in the region and the world, and they have the ability to influence the political solution and play a future role in reconstruction after the war ends.
How do you see the stubbornness of the Sudanese army and its insistence on militarily resolving the battle?
There are many voices within the army that desire a solution, peace, and stability for the country. However, the political mobilization by the remnants of the previous regime continues as they see the necessity of continuing the war because they know that it is their last war.
There is talk about forming a government. In your opinion, will this government have an impact on the current situation?
There is currently a de facto government, what is its role? Such talk is an evasion of the political commitments that call for stopping the war.
The controversy about Hamidtis death continues. According to your information, is the man really dead or still alive?
According to my information from the Forces of Freedom and Changes communication committee with the army and the Rapid Support Forces, he is still alive.
On October 10, the Human Rights Council decided to form an international fact-finding committee. How do you see this decision?
This is an important decision and it will affect the course of the war by sending a strong message to the warring parties that it is impossible to escape punishment again.
In your opinion, what is required to address the issue of war in Sudan?
First, what is required is negotiations that lead to a ceasefire and the opening of humanitarian corridors in the first phase because the peoples conditions are very harsh, and death continues by weapons and due to lack of medical care and food scarcity. The second phase is launching a political process, and this requires broader discussions that cannot be awaited under the continuation of gunfire. The political process will necessarily lead to the end of the military presence in power and the establishment of a civilian government.
There is talk from some intellectuals that the current war is against State 56. How do you see this talk?
The developmental imbalances in Sudan are inherited from the colonial era, where the scarce development was concentrated in what the researcher Tim Niblock described as the letter (T), with its head in Khartoum and its tail in Sinjar. Civilian governments have not had the opportunity to make any adjustments due to their short durations and the disturbances they face. Therefore, this state will not continue, and its inability to represent everyone has become evident.
Do you think the Rapid Support Forces are qualified to establish a new state on the ruins of State 56?
The new state will be founded by everyone, not just the Rapid Support Forces, otherwise the defect will persist. The new state will have a single professional army, fair distribution of power and wealth based on true federalism, and an efficient civil service that is not monopolized by any party or entity.
There is talk that the Sudanese army is the largest political party. How do you see this?
The Sudanese peoples involvement in the longest civil war in modern history has made the army continuously engage in politics because it affects the core of its work and life. The civil war raises daily political questions about representation in power, wealth sharing, etc. Therefore, building a professional army necessarily requires resolving the ongoing internal war questions because it is the continuous political gateway and then the power.
