Jeddah Negotiating Platform: A Step Forward Two Steps Back
Abdullah Rizk Abusimaza
After a long anticipation of a press conference, the Jeddah Platform Negotiating Facilitators Team, as nominated in the Sochal Media, last Sunday evening, the Group issued a statement on Tuesday evening of the outcome of what was agreed between the parties to the April 15 War, regarding "Facilitating the passage of humanitarian assistance" and "confidence-building measures", as well as acknowledging the Panels failure to compel the parties to accept an immediate and unconditional ceasefire.
As the Panel moves forward with this agreement, a step towards a cessation of war and an end to hostilities, the second after last May 11 "Jeddah Humanitarian Declaration", it is taking at least two steps back by failing to achieve a ceasefire agreement, the most important link, in the series of issues and themes related to ending the war. From the outset, it can be noted that the negotiating methodology has advanced the premise that the issues of war and peace, their themes, and the separation of such issues and topics, such as the humanitarian issue, can be replaced by a mechanical chapter, with its distinctive interdependence.
The ceasefire is a key issue for the issues on the agenda and the medium of the current round of negotiations, and has been identified as follows:
- "Delivery of humanitarian assistance;
- Achieving the ceasefire and confidence-building measures;
- The possibility of a permanent cessation of hostilities. "
An immediate and unconditional ceasefire is a humanitarian imperative before any other consideration, an indispensable condition for the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those in need and, before that, to enable citizens who have been removed from their homes to return to their homes to end the tragedy of forced displacement and forced displacement. According to widespread estimates, the absurd war has displaced seven million citizens, three of them from the capital Khartoum, which has an estimated population of five million. It is also the most important bloodshed in the building of trust between the two sides of the war.
The idea of isolating the humanitarian issue from all war issues and addressing it independently of it seems a unique entry point, but it is not conceivable in fact. (Perhaps historic terms, they are no longer, enabling the reboot of the famous lifeline program).
In this context, the idea of "building trust during mutual bombardment" is not without circumstance, it is romantic, but it amounts to a description of magical realism, when it comes to the solidarity of both sides of the war to suppress the agitators of war, as the recipe for building trust suggests!
The failure to achieve a ceasefire, in this round of negotiation, means -- at least -- that there are still those who believe in the possibility of military resolution, which must be reminded, once again, that "there is no acceptable military solution to this conflict", as stated in the statement of the facilitators.
The agreement may seem like a good first step, a small but important, positive step towards ending the war. However, they fall short of citizens aspirations, vilified by the flames of war, displacement and forced displacement.
The Jeddah Negotiating Facilitators Group seems to have little interest in stopping the fate and implementation of the commitments arranged by the May 11 Agreement, particularly with regard to the protection of civilians and the opening of safe corridors, before overburdening them with further commitments with no clear guarantees on their implementation.
