Although the new Sudanese Prime Minister, Abdullah Hamdock, visited Washington last week, and agreed with the Americans to exchange ambassadors, for the first time in 23 years, Sudan and the United States still have a long way to go before normalizing their relations. In 1997, the United States placed Sudan and its former leader Omar al-Bashir, wanted by the International Criminal Court, on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Al-Bashir has already been harboring terrorists in his country, including the former leader of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden. The Bashir regime was involved in dozens of terrorist acts, including the bombing of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, and the attack on the American destroyer "USS Cole" in 2000.
Fragile state
Although the era of Bashir has passed, Sudan remains on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which places many obstacles before the new Sudan, because the new government is still fragile, and the forces that oppose it are very strong, and the transitional phase towards democracy will be difficult, but it will be more severe Difficult if Sudan remains on the list of state sponsors of terrorism.
Over the past month, the US State Department has made it more difficult for Sudan in its quest to overcome this dilemma, declaring that Sudan should make progress in six areas before America begins reviewing its status, and these areas include: More cooperation with the United States to fight Terrorism, improving human rights protection, including freedom of religion and the press, allowing humanitarian access, ending wars and conflicts with rebels inside the country, proving that Sudan no longer supports terrorism, and severing ties with North Korea.
Despite being included in the terrorism list, the United States continued to obtain intelligence from the Bashir regime in exchange for preventing the international community from criticizing Khartoum. Although removing the name of Sudan from the list of state sponsors of terrorism would have encouraged the Bashir government to cooperate more with the United States, the United States government wants to keep Sudan on this list to maintain its influence on it.
When the administration of President Barack Obama began adopting a more open policy towards Sudan in 2015 and canceled long-term economic sanctions, in preparation for a discussion of removing the country’s name from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, many Sudanese opposed this policy, claiming that it works to strengthen the Bashir regime only , Which the Sudanese people considered a criminal and an illegitimate president, who killed, tortured, and displaced millions of Sudanese, and for this they consider lifting Sudan from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism at that time an agreement with the devil.
Punishment
However, keeping the name of Sudan on the list of state sponsors of terrorism would undermine the young government and punish it for crimes committed by the Bashir regime, while Hamddock is struggling to break the burden of the huge debt that Sudan is laden with, and strives to attract trade and investment. At the present time, the economic situation seems to be in a state of free fall, and the prices of basic materials and medicines continue to rise at a steady pace. In fact, removing Sudan from the list of terrorism-sponsoring states will help the new government get rid of the debt burden, and open the door for international and regional investments, as well as trade, which is vital to stimulating the ailing depleted Sudanese economy, and rid of years of corruption. Sudan will have an opportunity to get involved in the international banking system, enhancing the new government's capabilities to tackle corruption and dismantle terrorist financing mechanisms and criminal networks. Sudanese citizens should not be punished for the mistakes of the previous regime, which made them suffer a lot, and sacrifice a lot to get rid of them.
Hamdock has taken a series of encouraging steps, showing his government's readiness to be a responsible member of the international community. He encouraged organizations banned by the former regime to return to Sudan and support the UN's engagement in conflict-affected areas. Hamdok included in his government women, human rights activists, media advocates and media freedom. He announced the establishment of a law reform committee, and showed great commitment to the principles of equality in citizenship, including freedom of religion, and gender equality, while the Minister of Justice addresses cases of discrimination and inequality. The most important thing appears to be that the government is controlled by secular, pro-democracy officials.
Plan to return the displaced
Hamdock developed a plan to return internally displaced persons to their homes and villages, and signed agreements with the United Nations to deliver humanitarian aid across the country. Earlier this year, the World Food Program sent food aid to rebel areas in the Nuba Mountains, for the first time since 2011. This transitional government opened all avenues to humanitarian aid and trade, allowing many areas in the Nuba Mountains to re-engage in markets. Their traditional societies after 10 years of downtime. Ultimately, Hamdock expressed interest in ending conflict in Sudan, in areas such as Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile State.
The transitional government began to dismantle the military and commercial networks that were helping the former regime survive, although it was difficult to move against religiously militant groups without strengthening the new government's ability to govern. The government began negotiating with local armed movements, and enhanced humanitarian access within the country, in addition to strengthening the position of NGOs and human rights in the new Sudan.
The political change in Sudan came as a result of a revolution aimed at uprooting 30 years of religious rule. Regardless of what is known as the “Arab Spring,” the Sudanese revolution was fundamentally opposed to the ideology of “militia Islam,” which deepened in the past and led to impoverishment of the state. Although 60% of its population lives below the poverty line, Sudan's potential helps it grow and engage with the international community.
But it will be almost impossible for Sudan to meet the many conditions necessary to remove its name from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, while it is still whining and under the weight of its restrictions. There are risks that Sudan's recent gains could be lost in order to remove his name from a list that is in fact quite far from its stigma.
Washington must realize that the new civilian government in Sudan has no interest in supporting terrorism or extremist ideologies. Indeed, Sudan has taken several steps to work with the United States to combat terrorism. In 2018, the Government of Sudan continued to fight terrorism alongside regional partners, including operations to counter threats to the interests of the United States and its personnel present in Sudan.
Hala Al-Karib and Sadiq Hassan, Director of the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa
Secretary General of the Bar Association in Darfur
The best fortress
The establishment of a strong Sudanese civil government representing the country is the best bulwark to counter the return of the old regime and its support for terrorists, just as Sudan’s survival in the list of state sponsors of terrorism adds unjust economic and political burdens to the government, which charts the footsteps of what former US President Jimmy Carter said “give democracy in Sudan An opportunity », it is in the interest of the United States to immediately remove Sudan from the list of state sponsors of terrorism.
Rather than isolating and punishing the new civilian government, the international community should help dismantle terrorist financing networks. The world must not stand idly by, while the legacy of the previous terrorist regime represents a potential and hostile threat to revolution and democracy.
Although the Bashir era has passed, Sudan remains on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which places many obstacles before the new Sudan, because the new government is still fragile, and the forces that oppose it are very strong.