KHARTOUM -

The Sudanese political arena is witnessing great confusion and sharp disagreement after the speech of the army chief, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, which included the withdrawal of the military establishment from dialogue and the call for the formation of a civilian government, and a pledge to dissolve the current sovereign council and to form another later on security and military affairs.

While some rejected these decisions and considered them to be just an open maneuver, others welcomed the decisions of the army chief and called for seizing the opportunity and sitting at a political dialogue table that includes everyone, in order to reach understandings that end the crisis situation in this country.

Yasser Arman, deputy head of the SPLM, revealed that the military component handed over a memorandum a few days ago to the tripartite mechanism - the United Nations, the African Union, the East and Central African Organization (IGAD) - and parties from the international community that have not been announced, clearly containing the tasks of the Supreme Military Council of the Armed Forces, chiefly Exercising the functions of sovereignty, aspects of foreign policy, the Bank of Sudan, and other issues.

Positive points

After a lengthy meeting held by the pro-military National Accord Group, the group’s Secretary-General Mubarak Ardol said that what Al-Burhan had raised included positive and ambiguous points that need more clarity in order to reach national consensus. .

The originally Democratic Unionist Party welcomed Al-Burhan's decisions, saying that what the army chief said was a confirmation of the party's position calling for the partnership not to be repeated and for the military component to leave the dialogue, giving civilians a full opportunity among themselves to produce solutions that lead to a government of civilian competencies.

The army commander's decisions also won the support of the Umma Party, led by Mubarak Al-Fadil, and Sufi currents and civil entities announced their support for the decisions.

The Binaa Sudan Party praised the decisions of Al-Burhan, and called on the political forces to deal with them positively. The leader of the party, Yaqoub Marzouk, explained that his party’s vision stems from the army’s involvement in the political process since independence, adding, “We are with the need to completely move away from it, and this is a big and strategic change that cannot be achieved with one strike.” But gradually.

Marzouk indicates to Al Jazeera Net that the army leaders themselves must be convinced of the change and part of achieving the same goal to ensure the sustainability of the change.

At the same time, however, he excludes the parties' agreement on an integrated technocratic government, and considers that it is better to agree on a prime minister only who will personally undertake the formation of his government freely.

Marzouk says that his party suggested pushing Dr. Abdullah Hamdok to this task again.

Marzouk expects the return of the National Congress - the former ruling party - to the dialogue table under the banner of the broad Islamic trend, and says that what reinforces this is the political forces' reluctance to deal positively with the recent developments, which allows the National Congress to return to the political scene again.

Ardol affirmed their intention to enter into the political dialogue with an open heart and without preconditions, with contacting the Central Council group of the Freedom and Change Alliance to agree on points of contention and address them.


open maneuver

On the other hand, visions were divided regarding the decisions of the army commander within the opposition Freedom and Change Coalition, which held two stormy meetings. emptying this principle of its content.

The statement stressed that Al-Burhan's attempt to portray the crisis as a conflict between civilians "is nothing but a scattering of ashes in El-Ayoun," and that the generalization of the term civilians confuses the forces of the revolution that resisted the coup and those civil parties that supported it or were within the system of the former regime, which requires the correct definition of the crisis. to lead to the correct solution.

The solution, from the coalition's point of view, begins with the resignation of the "revolutionary authority", and then "the formation of the revolutionary forces for a full transitional civilian authority in accordance with a constitutional declaration that defines the structures of the transition and its issues, including the issue of the role and tasks of the military institution."

The different reactions to Al-Burhan's decisions mean the difficulty of reaching any possible understandings that could lead to the formation of a technocratic government, and opening the door for the military component to announce soon the organization of early elections and handing over the reins of power to those who reap the highest votes in them.

For its part, the Sudanese Communist Party believes that Al-Burhan's speech confirms the validity of the leaks that circulated about a political settlement through the formation of a civilian government and a security and defense council.

In a statement issued by his central committee, he said, "With this speech, all the pitfalls of the settlement, its dimensions, the forces that planned it and the forces entrusted with implementing what was agreed upon in closed rooms under the auspices of the American and Saudi administrations became clear," stressing that he rejects this settlement and bets on the public escalation to overthrow the authority and its allies.


Historic opportunity

Security expert Major General Amin Ismail Majzoub believes that Al-Burhan put the ball in the court of political forces, especially that the army's withdrawal from the political scene is an implementation of some of the conditions set by the political and revolutionary forces. It belongs to the army and other forces included with it.

Majzoub confirms to Al Jazeera Net that the political forces are in front of a historical opportunity to gather their parties and build a national position to form a government quickly that allows the dissolution of the Sovereignty Council, and then looks at how to complete the democratic transition and establish a civil government, ruling out that the behavior of Al-Burhan is a tactical position, but a serious attempt to resolve the crisis in the country. .

According to the security expert, the political forces and the resistance committees are invited to review their positions and the conditions they set, because the negotiation between them has now become one-way, while it was previously between the political forces and the military component, and it is not negotiation but rather consultation and coordination to form a government of technocrats and choose an agreed prime minister. And then determining the nature of the state's leadership with the armed forces, either through a new Sovereign Council or a republican presidency.