Distrust of the military in Sudan

The continuous anti-October coup protests in Sudan even after the civilian Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok has been reinstated on November 21 is worrisome. There has been an uneasy alliance between the military and civilian groups called Forces of Freedom and Change Coalition after the long-time leader, Omar Al Bashir, has been removed in April 2019.

The military coup in October revealed the fragile equation between the military and the civilians. There have been continued protests against the military takeover accompanied by intense international pressure. This has led to the reinstatement of the civilian government. According to the truce terms, there is to be a technocratic cabinet led by Hamdok and the elections are to be held under military oversight. The protesters are rejecting the oversight role assigned to the military. They want the transition government to be wholly civilian without any interference from the military.

Even as protesters planned to march to the Presidential Palace in Khartoum, the security forces have cordoned the capital city, and even blocked the Internet to disable the protesters coming into the capital communicate and coordinate with each other. This has not in any way intimidated or inhibited the protesters. Despite restrictions and warnings from the local security coordination committee, the protesters poured into Khartoum.

The military has warned that the protesters should not approach “sovereign and strategic” sites, and that if anyone were to do so, it would be considered a violation of law and action would be taken. The security forces fired tear gas to disperse thousands of protesters in Khartoum on Saturday.

But the protesters, who seem to come from all parts of the country and all sections of society, are determined to keep the military out of the political process. The slogan of the protesters is “no negotiation, no partnership, no legitimacy” with the military. That is clear, emphatic language. Earlier, the military was able to impose its will on an unwilling people through sheer strength of arms.

The might of arms does not seem to deter the people now. It is a heartening development in Sudan, and this could have a positive fallout for other countries in Africa fighting for democracy. It is possible that people are emboldened to confront the military because foreign countries are not any more interested in beefing up the militaries in these countries. The argument of Western powers for supporting military rulers in Third World countries was that it was to keep communism out. In the last two decades too, there has been an attempt by the Western powers to support the military on the pretext of keeping religious extremists taking over political power. But even this is weakening. The Western world seems to be caught up in its own problems and it is not any more interested in running proxy governments in other parts of the world.

But if people’s power and democracy are to survive in Sudan and in other countries, it will be necessary for the Western powers and other world organisations to extend financial and technological assistance to these countries. It is when poor countries descend into chaos due to economic problems, that the military or the religious extremists step in with the false promise that they will restore order. Economic distress and lack of development are the two main reasons that democracies cannot thrive or survive in Third World countries.

 The West can help by extending economic and technological assistance, and the people would choose freedom and democracy to conduct their political affairs. It is an opportunity for the rest of the world to support the people of Sudan to set up a democratic order in their country.