On the afternoon of Ramadan, Al-Jazeera Net visited Al-Sadiq al-Mahdi, "Imam Al-Ansar", head of the Umma Party, and the elected Prime Minister who was ousted by the Islamist coup led by ousted President Omar al-Bashir.
The meeting was in a house that tells all of its angles about a family whose history has been linked to Sudan since the dawn of the Mahdist revolution until this people's day.
In this interview, Al-Sadiq Al-Mahdi was frank and clear, and his voice was beset with some pain when he talked about the need to silence the guns and end the war in Yemen, and to put a clear line for any Sudanese forces participation in any war outside the borders.
In the same frankness, Al-Mahdi talked about the situation in Libya, and he appealed to the parties to listen to the voice of the Libyan people, who represent the victim to which the regional and international powers rallied the war, and the end for the Sudanese leader is free and fair elections that express the will of the Libyans.
On the level of regional relations, Al-Sadiq Al-Mahdi called for a strategic agreement in the Middle East, whose poles and pillars would be Arabs, Turkey and Iran, in order to achieve security and stability, and he called for the normalization of Sudanese-Iranian relations that were cut off by the isolated regime.
But what was new that could represent a great controversy came when Sadiq al-Mahdi spoke about water security, and the difference of views between Sudan, Egypt and Ethiopia about the Renaissance Dam; The Mahdi proposes the idea of an international conference and a new agreement on the waters of the Nile, covering all countries of the Nile Basin.
In this regard, the imam notes that the 1959 agreement, which divided the waters of the Nile between Egypt and Sudan, was a major mistake, expressing his hope that it would not be renewed by a new tripartite agreement neglecting the rest of the Nile Basin countries.
In the dialogue - which did not neglect internal issues - Al-Mahdi presented a gift to the transitional government generals who participated in the December popular revolution, when he called for giving them an amnesty for past crimes in appreciation of their bias towards the people, but he welcomed them in the political arena after they took off the military uniform.
He also spoke bitterly about party colleagues in the Freedom and Change Alliance, who infiltrated the cabinet, and demanded that the situation be corrected, and the Mahdi was not satisfied with the performance of the transitional government, especially with regard to foreign relations, which he described as managed on improvisation, away from any national strategy.
The following is the text of the interview:
To what extent have the transitional government expressed slogans to distance themselves from the axes and uphold the national interest?
The current situation is turbulent; The previous regime inherited chaos and opportunism in foreign relations, at times the Americans negotiated, and at the same moment it requested protection from the Russians, so we called for a national conference on foreign relations that sets out the principle that Sudan's Arab and African relations be balanced, and that Sudan has no role in any wars outside Sudan.
We must call on our people in Africa and the Arab world to silence the guns, and this is in line with the African Union’s decisions to silence the guns in 2020. The wars in the Arab region are causing direct harm to the people of those regions, and I, as president of the World Forum on Moderation, issued a statement in which we appealed to all the Arab countries Stop wars and make general reconciliations.
What about understanding these concepts in Sudan's external relations?
The current government in Sudan has not taken the required decisions on these issues. Perhaps the matter of external relations has not been decided yet, and we say and confirm that the policies currently applied in the field of external relations are improvisational and not attributed to the national strategy, and this is why we demanded in the New Testament document that the external relationship be based on an exchange of interests and balance.
You talked about withdrawing the Sudanese armies from foreign wars, and we have a large army in Yemen .. What do you see?
We are demanding an end to the war in Yemen, and for this we welcomed the Saudi position on the ceasefire in Yemen, and we also welcomed the withdrawal of the UAE from some of its armies from Yemen.
This goes on the path of peaceful solutions; The war in Yemen has brought harm to all parties involved in it, as well as the war in Libya and Syria. We are keen on the interest of the Arab nation, and this is why we call on them to stop these wars. Surprisingly, the United Nations is also calling for an end to these wars, and we support this trend.
What about Libya? How can we get out of the impasse?
We supported the Berlin forum, which presented an advanced view on the Skhirat agreement, and this should be based on what was agreed upon in Berlin, as it became very clear that there is no way to resolve the war in Libya because of foreign interference, so the weaker a party that has been championed by a foreign party in order not to lose.
The major international powers are divided over Libya. That is why I appeal to the brothers Hifter and al-Sarraj to act quickly to conclude a political agreement to stop the war and establish free elections in Libya so that the Libyan people determine who governs them.
You have a great knowledge of Libyan affairs, and you are the president of the Al-Wasatia Forum. Why do you not play a role in Libya?
I will do this with a group of 24 persons representing leaders in the Arab world, and I will discuss with these practical steps that must be taken, and we must not stand idly by, and we will strive to stop all wars in Africa and the Arab world.
There is now talk of lands occupied by the Ethiopians in the east, in addition to Halayeb in the north. How does the imam view the Sudan border file?
Most of our borders with our neighbors are transcendent, we must take the following positions: First, do not retreat from any Sudanese land, secondly we do not seek to recover our right by force, but we resort to the International Court of Justice in all disputed border issues, and this court was established to resolve conflicts between different countries as an alternative to war .
What about Halaib, is the position included in it?
Yes, covered by the situation. Then he laughed: "There is no Sudanese in Halayeb who says Egyptian, and no Egyptian says Sudanese Halayeb." This means that there is only disagreement that we have to exclude the military agenda.
But Egypt rejects the option of resorting to the International Court of Justice, and the court does not consider a case without the consent of the two parties?
We will continue to say to all parties that we will not give up our rights, avoid a military solution, and appeal to all parties with border disputes to accept the decisions of the International Court of Justice.
Water is present in all international relations, and now there are differences between Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia over the water file and the construction of the Renaissance Dam, what is the vision of the Umma Party?
There are mistakes committed in the management of water in the Nile Basin, for example the Nile Water Agreement of 1959 between Egypt and Sudan did not involve the rest of the Nile Basin countries, and this was a mistake.
Now the dispute over the waters of the Nile should not be confined to three countries. For the Nile is a water unit, an international conference must be established that includes all countries of the Nile Basin to conclude an international agreement on the waters of the Nile, especially as the waters of the Nile do not stop at a stagnant level; For example, Jonglei can supply the Nile water with 20 billion cubic meters if it is implemented, and I have a book that made it clear.
What about the relationship with Iran in its two dimensions: with Sudan and the Arab world?
I have said more than once that a Shiite Sunni must be reconciled, because Shiites and Sunnis live in common areas, and this issue is 14 centuries old, and it cannot be settled with controversy or war. The Europeans, after thirty years of war, concluded the Westphalian Agreement, which halted religious wars in Europe, and we should bypass Sunni-Shiite confrontations.
And I go on to more than that, so the Greater Middle East said that it needs an Arab-Turkish strategic security agreement, and this matter requires rational initiatives in the region, so there is no possibility to erase any of these three components.
What about the Sudanese-Iranian relations?
We should not manipulate this issue as the deposed regime did, which depended on Iran for everything. (Then he smiled) Personally, during the days of the arrest, they told me that we have learned methods of torture from the Iranians that we will apply to you, but they did not. The important thing is that relations with all countries should be normalized.
Including Iran?
Yes, all countries but Israel, we need normal relations with all countries, and with normalization we take into account each other's interests.
Why did Israel exclude?
We are against any hostility with the Jews, and we have a "call of the faiths" project that includes all Islamic, Christian, and Jewish boredom, in order to coexist with all religions, and with regard to relations with Israel there are two drawbacks: Israel has sanctioned the Jewish state’s decision, and 20% of the population is Arab, this matter deprives them Citizenship rights, and here Israel, like the former South Africa, is a country of apartheid.
The second issue is the "Deal of the Century" project, and we reject the deal for a clear reason, as it considered that there is no Palestinian right, and this contradicts the Security Council resolutions, and means enabling the Israeli right to annex the West Bank and the Jordan Valley.
Despite these reservations, the Sudanese government reached out to Israel by visiting Kampala, where the Netanyahu summit and the proof were held?
We rejected that for these initial reasons. There is no national interest in normalization with Israel, and we do not need a conference to normalize with a racist state.
You talked about the conditions for the Islamists to return to political practice in Sudan. What about the Brotherhood movements in the Arab and Islamic world?
I reserve the expression of the Islamists, there is no political Islam, but rather the politics of Islamists, and when I was in Egypt and the death sentence was passed for the late Muhammad Morsi and Muhammad Badi, I appealed to President Sisi to issue an amnesty, because there are two views between the Brotherhood movement; There are those who saw the continuation of the pledge of allegiance to the late Mohamed Morsi and permitted the assassination as a punishment.
While Mr. Ibrahim Mounir, deputy leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, said no punishment, and called for peaceful solutions, and affirmed the group’s position, so I intervened and appealed to Sisi. The differences are old between the Brotherhood, between the tolerant schools of Hudaybi and Sayed Qutb.
This means that the Muslim Brotherhood movements need intellectual revisions, and they should be guided by Erdogan's experience in Turkey, who coexisted and reconciled with secularism, as well as the experience of Islamists in Tunisia and Morocco, which accepts the other opinion, pluralism and arbitration of democracy, and these are necessary reviews to reconcile with the future.
And they should benefit from the experience of the Sudan Brotherhood, especially since the Brotherhood was refusing to implement Sharia through force even before their branch seized power in Sudan. In general, the Brotherhood movement is rooted in many countries, but it is important to open a space for reconciliation with others.
Why is the relationship with your allies in freedom and change so tense that your party has frozen its membership in this historic alliance?
The change in Sudan was surprising and was accompanied by movements, including the general command of the army welcoming the sit-in, as well as the bias of the security committee prepared for the oppression of the people. These sudden developments led to urgent arrangements for freedom and change, an alliance with a high degree of diversity. This effort succeeded in the previous period, but there are many faults that should have been addressed from national platforms, such as foreign relations, the economy, education, and peace.
But improvised actions occurred, which created a kind of frustration that led the forces of apostasy to contemplate overthrowing the gains of the people.
There are also groups with limited selective thinking, which have tried to exploit these faults to achieve partisan gains, and there are external parties that are very interested in what is happening in Sudan, and seek to influence it in a way that contradicts the interests of the Sudanese people; For all of this, we studied in the Umma Party, and presented a vision titled "Towards a New Social Contract to Build a Country".
What are the most prominent features of this new social contract?
This contract we proposed to discuss in a broad manner, and freedom and change and other forces that we have identified in order to implement this social contract are shared, and letters were sent to Mr. Chairman of the Sovereign Council Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah Al Burhan and Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdouk and the team Muhammad Hamdan Hamidati, Vice President of the Sovereign Council, and our colleagues in freedom and change, and we suggested this The solution. The freeze was a first step, and we are now talking about a new birth that our party shares with others.
Who do you mean by other powers?
There are many forces that participated in the revolution and signed the Declaration of Freedom and Change, but they did not participate in the arrangements of the past period. Likewise, there are other traditional forces such as tribal leaders and Sufi leaders besides civil society organizations.
What about the forces that participated in the regime?
We have appealed to them to self-criticize and recognize the coup against democracy, as well as to recognize the establishment of totalitarianism and the isolation of other powers and distort the Islamic slogan. Such criticism was made by many Islamic movements, as well as preparing to appear for legal accountability through a law. Where did you get this? Many of them enriched immensely richly, in the end there will be a transitional justice law, which defines how those people participate in building the country, and I hope that the leaders of the former regime will abandon the conspiracy that some of them are now doing.
This means that they have a chance to return to the political scene?
We are not talking about eradicating these people as they exist, but the return takes place through the transitional justice law, which will account for all who spoil, and release the person who did not commit a crime.
As long as you talk about corruption, are there reservations about the regime’s dismantling committee, whose mission is to fight corruption?
Simply put, this was supposed to be done through the Anti-Corruption Commission, according to the constitutional document, and this commission gives the procedures a legal and constitutional bond, and now under these arrangements it is possible to appeal legally, and then impunity.
I believe that this procedure is incomplete, and on the whole the Umma Party with the dissolution of the former regime, and there is no disagreement on the principle, but in the degree of the lawfulness of this procedure, and this opinion stems from the recommendations of a committee formed in the party for this purpose.
The issue of choosing civilian governors remains an issue of push and pull, why?
We have seen that the governors are qualified, and among the people of the state “what the governor comes with Parachute”, and if it is impossible to agree for any reason, let it be elections at the state level, according to the constitutional document, the general elections alone that are held at the end of the transitional period while being silent on other levels, but we see the importance And the need to hold elections at the local level.
What about the political affiliation of the governor; Should the governor be independent?
The condition of non-partisan affiliation applies only to participation in the Transitional Cabinet and the Sovereign Council, and despite that political parties "stole the bak", which brought in people with little experience, some of whom took advantage of the site to serve his party, and these are among the things that we demand to review.
How did you allow them to steal so to speak?
We have our position in the Central Council for Freedom and Change was clear and principled on this point, but our colleagues in the Central Council overcame us with a vote, and unfortunately there is no vote likely in the Central Council, and the parties are equal, large and large when voting, and these distortions we demand to review now.
But there are those who say that the Umma Party is present in the Council of Ministers, and there are prominent names such as Finance Minister Ibrahim al-Badawi and Minister of Religious Affairs Nasruddin Mufreh belonging to the Umma Party?
We did not nominate any of them, and they came to the public office through other channels, and we did not submit any candidacy for the cabinet membership. It is true that there are members of the Sovereign Council and the Council of Ministers belonging to the Umma Party, and this was done despite the Umma party's nose, and not based on his desire.
But can the same logic be provided by the Baath Party or the Communist Party to justify its presence in the cabinet?
We know how these came, they came with great care, but rather they voted to enter partisan names, and we understand the logic of these because many of them have no way to gain access to public jurisdiction except in this exceptional period.
What about general early elections if a conflict occurs during the transitional period?
The governors and local elections did not talk about the constitutional document, and therefore this is subject to a new vision, considering that the document did not talk about how to choose governors or localities, and we say if it is not possible to agree on choosing governors, the election is the best way to resolve the matter.
What if a conflict occurs during the transitional period, or the forces of freedom and change reject the thesis of the new social contract that you are calling for? Is early elections an emergency exit?
For every recent incident, we cannot talk about assumptions.
I am here talking about the principle of returning to the Sudanese people if major differences occurred before the completion of the transitional period?
All dictatorships fell when elections were held; This happened in South Africa, in Chile and in Spain. Resorting to the people to choose their representatives is natural and well-known, but after the revolution we saw that the country inherited a heavy legacy, so it was agreed that the transitional period would be three years, in order to dismantle the heavy legacy, and this presupposes the success of the transitional period in carrying out this task, but if we reach a path Dead end, democracy must be restored through elections.
But there are voices calling for the extension of the transitional period?
There is no way to extend the transitional period, but it can be shortened.
You have reservations about the methodology of peace management in the negotiations in Juba, so what is the best methodology?
Peace requires defining a peace strategy, which depends on identifying the causes of war in the first place, among which is political, economic, social and cultural marginalization. This marginalization was one of the reasons that led to the war. What must be agreed upon is the things that were caused by the war, and then dealt with by displacement, asylum and burning villages.
Is the current path to peace does not lead to the same results?
Now there is an opportunity to wave different ideologies unrelated to the causes of war; For example, a certain party stipulates secularism in exchange for peace, and secularism was not a cause of war, when elections come, there is no objection to everyone offering everything that they want, and then leaving the decision to the people. The achievement of peace should be through a commission, and it should not be left as it is now for the enthusiasm of those who participate, and then the peace agreement as a whole will enter into the constitution, in order to protect it.
How do you deal with the outputs of the current peace rounds, which have made commitments in the area of the division of power and wealth?
We said clearly we will study these results, accept what is included in the peace project and leave what represent programs, and we will not accept anything outside of that, and what is happening now does not represent a binding national consensus. Some parties entered peace spontaneously, and we will accept all legitimate agreements and reject any less.
What about the future of the generals who sided with the people in their revolution?
These generals should be included in an amnesty for any crimes they committed while working with the former regime, because of their siding with the people and their refusal to obey the decisions of the ousted President Omar al-Bashir.
Secondly, after the end of the transitional period, whoever wants to continue in the military corps can continue, and whoever wants to play a political role plays it from a civil standpoint. These are important measures for the transition arrangements from the transitional period to the next, and they are citizens with the right to form parties or join existing ones.
Does this include errors and crimes that occurred during the transitional period, such as breaking up a sit-in?
There is an independent committee to investigate the break-up of the sit-in, and based on the results of the investigations, we will take the proper "right" stance. But we have to distinguish between the crimes committed after the revolution and those that occurred before that. Post-revolution crimes are accountable, and whoever is designated is the independent commission tasked with the investigation.
You welcomed in the Umma party the provider of an international mission whose mandate is for all of Sudan?
Your information is wrong; Prime Minister (Abdullah Hamdouk) wrote a letter to the Security Council on January 27th and we issued a statement in which we refuse to do so considering that interference affects national sovereignty, but when Hamduk corrected a second letter last February we supported him, after having been absorbed All our observations, and without a second speech of everything that affects national sovereignty.
What about the relationship with the United States of America, there are those who see slow steps in this file?
Sudan is oppressed in this matter, as it was put on the American list of terrorism during the era of a regime that was sponsoring terrorism, and all the big names in the world of terrorism passed to Sudan, and diplomatic passports were granted, then the accountability was legitimate, then it was assumed that after the fall of the Bashir regime, all these accusations were crossed Spontaneously considering the birth of a new democratic Sudan free from any sponsorship of terrorism.
But why did not this happen?
I do not know, but in the matter of injustice, and perhaps it was made so to pressure Sudan, and the free Sudan should refuse any accountability for the crimes of the Bashir regime, including paying compensation to those affected by these crimes. We are victims, so how do we pay compensation.
The ideal situation would be to pay these compensation from the money of the fines imposed on the banks that dealt with Sudan during the previous regime, when one French bank paid more than eight billion. The second option is to take compensation from the money stolen by the leaders of the previous regime, and "they know who the sharks are, where are they?"
Are you satisfied with the performance of the transitional government in general? What about ensuring freedoms in Sudan?
The transitional government has committed major mistakes, but what is related to the field of freedoms is guaranteed to everyone, although some supporters of the ousted regime are trying to use these freedoms to finish off democratic gains, and this is rejected.