Sudan.. Why did the Freedom and Change Coalition turn the table and sit with the military?

KHARTOUM -

Leaders of the Freedom and Change Coalition in Sudan had no choice but to sit at one table with the military who ousted them from power on October 25;

The day before yesterday, Thursday, the first meeting between the two parties was suddenly held, after what was described as "intense pressures exerted by Western and Arab countries" on the leaders of the coalition, because of which they were forced to bow and hold a direct meeting that has been rejected by the street for about 7 months.

The Alliance for Freedom and Change and the Resistance Committees - since the actions taken by the army chief, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, described as a "coup" - have raised the slogan "No negotiation, no partnership, no legitimacy", in reference to the lack of recognition of the military's authority.

The coalition had announced its rejection of the initiative of the tripartite mechanism - led by the United Nations - calling for direct dialogue between the Sudanese parties, whose sessions began last Wednesday, but the coalition soon turned the tables on everyone by surprisingly agreeing to meet the military leaders, which provoked wide reactions, most of them rejecting and denouncing .

Part of the tripartite mechanism meeting that the Freedom and Change Coalition refused to participate in last Wednesday (Anatolia)

Problems with the triple mechanism

For his part, Al-Wathiq Al-Barir, Secretary-General of the Umma Party, the leader in the coalition - clarifies to Al Jazeera Net - that the "Freedom and Change" forces refrained from attending the meeting called for by the tripartite mechanism under the banner of direct dialogue due to basic problems, including the lack of definition of the nature of the current political crisis, as he sees The coalition believes that "the October 25 coup" is the main cause of the current crises, and this issue should be addressed with full transparency and clarity.

The second matter, according to al-Birir, is that the groups included in the invitation of the mechanism are supportive and supportive of the army’s actions, and that they include allies of the isolated regime.

According to the leader of the coalition, who participated in the meeting with the military, the success of the talks on ending the "coup" will come only by identifying the parties concerned with the crisis, the stages of ending the coup, and agreeing before that to create the atmosphere to start this process.

intense pressure

Sources - to Al Jazeera Net - say that the broad coalition faced intense pressure from Arab and international parties to get the leaders of freedom and change to sit down to meet the military directly, and the sources reported that the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Molly Fee, conveyed to the civilian component that the other side informed her that he did not know what The Alliance for Freedom and Change wants him, and that they should sit down to them directly and convey their demands.

The sources added, "After consultations and discussions that continued from Thursday morning until five in the afternoon, the Executive Office agreed to select 3 of its representatives to meet with the military at a neutral location."

She stressed that "main forces in the coalition were opposed to the move, but the majority saw approval, and the delivery of the vision of freedom and change based on ending the coup and its effects, to be an entry point for resolving the political crisis and confronting the military with all the demands of the street, so that the ball is in their court."

The Secretary-General of the Umma Party in Sudan, Al-Wathiq Al-Barir, said that the meeting between "Freedom and Change" and the military was stormy (communication sites)

stormy meeting

For his part, Al-Wathiq Al-Barir said that the discussion that took place between the military and the leaders of freedom and change, which lasted for about 5 hours, was stormy and transparent, and was punctuated by an exchange of criticism regarding the security and economic situation reached after the "coup."

According to al-Birir, the military group acknowledged the aggravation of the crisis, but they stressed that they do not bear responsibility alone and that there are many parties and reasons that led to what the situation has reached.

Al-Barir confirms that the Freedom and Change Coalition did not receive any response regarding their basic demand for dismantling and ending the "coup" and canceling the decisions taken after it, such as re-assigning the symbols of the former regime to the joints of the state.

He said, "The military asked to receive our demands for consideration, after confirming that the current situation needs solutions, whether from their side or from the civilian component."

Sources in "Freedom and Change" - to Al-Jazeera Net - said that the military conveyed to the facilitators of the meeting that the differences that afflict the political forces represent an obstacle to a comprehensive solution to the crisis, which makes them worried about the country's future if they leave the scene without a broad consensus among the civilian components.

They also said that their keenness to expand participation in the dialogue by bringing in parties not affiliated with the banner of freedom and change comes from seeking to create a national consensus and a platform on which everyone can stand at a minimum level of understandings.

Disagreements about the meeting

The meeting between the military and the leaders of "Freedom and Change" angered vital entities within the coalition itself, especially since the latter, months ago, dismissed two of its leaders, claiming they communicated with the military.

The leader of the Association of Professionals, Muhammad Naji Al-Asam - through his account on Twitter - criticized the coalition, and saw in the meeting of the military a miscalculation and a repetition of mistakes, especially with the continued repression and the killing of demonstrators in the streets.

The former Minister of Trade, Madani Abbas, also criticized the meeting of Freedom and Change with the military component, saying that the vision of the street that he expressed is correct, "do not negotiate with those who are addicted to treachery, and make it easy to tamper with the aspirations of the Sudanese people for democratic transformation."

But from the point of view of the former director of the US administration in the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nasr El-Din Wali, the direct meeting between the military and "Freedom and Change" is a very important first step, and it would lay out a practical framework for what the dialogue will include in a precise and specific way.

Wali told Al-Jazeera Net that this step will place restrictions on the military component, and prevent it from regressing from what was proposed and discussed directly and explicitly.

He continued, "Freedom and Change are right by accepting the invitation, because it is the military who need a lifeline now, and not the other way around."

Wali believes that the position of the coalition is much better than that of the military during the meeting, which set the negotiating agenda directly, shortening the long sessions of discussion that the dialogue sessions would have taken under the auspices of the tripartite mechanism.

The former diplomat points out that America is proceeding with its diplomatic and political push to ensure the transition through two tracks: the first is the bilateral track and the second is the multilateral track within the Troika and Friends of Sudan, in addition to strong support for proposing the tripartite mechanism.

He added, "To achieve its agenda, Washington put pressure on the regional forces that supported the coup," and said that "this meeting is the biggest evidence of regional countries changing their stance from supporting the coup to supporting the democratic transition."

different design

In turn, journalist and political analyst Abbas Muhammad Ibrahim believes that freedom and change succeeded in defining the framework required to end the coup and remove its effects by talking about quick and enforceable demands.

Ibrahim says - to Al Jazeera Net - "They were more clear that a return to the partnership model is not on the table. This puts us in front of a different proposal that works to remove the mines that led to the partnership and ended in the coup."

In terms of numbers, as Ibrahim says, freedom and change have achieved real gains by dismantling the mold designed by the tripartite mechanism, in favor of the street's agenda.

It also extracted a recognition that any framework that includes supporters of the coup from the civil forces and armed movements is premature, and must be preceded by steps that are limited to the parties to the crisis without anyone else.