The people of Sudan woke up today 25/10/2021 to movements erupting from the army that made arrests of some ministers in addition to a number of participants in the civilian transitional government, and then the arrest of Prime Minister Hamdok himself… Afterwards, Al-Burhan gave a televised speech in which he declared a state of emergency, dissolution of the Sovereignty Council and the transitional cabinet and the exemption of the directors of the states and then the undersecretaries of the ministries, and he called upon the general directors to manage the affairs of the ministries… He announced that he did not cancel the constitutional document, but rather canceled key articles from it as stated in his speech, and that he wanted to rectify the revolution’s course and not abandon the revolution! And all of this happened suddenly, as if the civilian component of the authority was not aware, so how did that go about? Will Sudan remain in a state of tension for many years, during which people will taste misery and adversity? Thank you.
I will start, my brother, from the end, as your statement (it happened suddenly) is not the case, for whoever studied the issue since the beginning of the power-sharing between the army and civilians have been aware that this partnership would not last. The two sides follow two different directions, Al-Burhan and Hemedti, and their supporters are backed by America, and Hamdok and his group are backed by Britain. Al-Burhan and Hamdok, each works for the interest of the side he follows, and they are far from the interest of the people, because taking care of the affairs that Islam calls for is out of the question for either of them! This is from one aspect and from another aspect, because the ruling is administered by one head, not by two heads running it on opposite sides! We have previously issued an answer to this issue since the beginning on 23 September 2019, i.e. since the beginning of the two sides’ participation in the government, and the following was stated in it about the agreement of the military with the civilian component to share power:
(What is expected? America and Britain will not coexist quietly. Their interests are different and their local tools follow, so both sides will work to abort the movements of the other! By following up the current events, studying their related issues and examining statements externally and locally, especially of American and European officials, we can work out the likely means that both sides will use to harass its opponent and then exclude it from power…) and we have mentioned them there, and this is what actually happened. To clarify matters, we review the following:
First: The situation and conflict in Sudan:
1- Sudan is an early Islamic country, but is controlled by America with its international influence and its regional tools, and most importantly through its local agents. While the ruling regime in Sudan serves American policy in a cheap way, the people of Sudan suffer injustice, hunger, deprivation and unemployment, and whenever the people of Sudan rise with an uprising or revolution, they want change and they want Islam, these rulers set obstacles, barricades and apprehensions in front of them to prevent them from reaching their goals, which are the goals of the Sudanese and the goals of the entire Islamic Ummah. Then they transferred the struggle from the Ummah’s struggle against its puppet rulers to a struggle between America’s agents with the (relatively) new influence in Sudan, and the agents of Britain, which had the old influence since its colonization of Sudan. With this equation of conflict, America’s agents ensure distancing the Ummah in Sudan from the reality of the conflict between Islam and the agents of Kufr countries.
2- As America’s agents (the Military Council) are governed by what was called the “constitutional document” with the English and Europeans agents (the leaders of the Forces of Freedom and Change and its nucleus the Sudanese Professionals Association, loyal parties and armed movements); that document that was signed between the two sides on 21 August 2019, by which it was decided that the military would lead the Sovereignty Council (presidential) for a period of 21 months, then civilians would lead it for 18 months, starting from last May, meaning that the transitional period is 39 months. However, an amendment was made after the Juba Agreement signed on 03/10/2020, whereby the period became 53 months, and then civilians would assume next November. Thus, it becomes clear that the agreement concluded in 2019 between civilians in the Forces of Freedom and Change and the Military Council was a trap set by the Military Council and behind it by America for these forces by making the first-term presidency of the Sovereignty Council for the military and the second term for civilians, so the Forces of Freedom and Change were deluded that they would be handed over the presidency of the Council, meaning the rule of Sudan after the first 21 months. And if this were possible, the British and European agents would have been able to make extensive changes to the leadership of the army and financing it in a way that threatens American influence in Sudan, and this is not allowed by America.
3- As for the British, they stand publicly with their agents, (Britain expressed, on Wednesday, its willingness to help solve the current political crisis in Sudan, within the initiative of its Prime Minister, Abdullah Hamdouk… Hamdouk met, in Khartoum, Wednesday, with the British Foreign Secretary for Africa, Vicky Ford, in the presence of the the British envoy to Sudan, Robert Fairweather, and the British ambassador to Khartoum, Giles Leifer. Ford stressed her country’s support for the civil democratic transition in Sudan, expressing her concern about the current political crisis… And she added that London is also concerned about: “The living crisis as a result of the closure of the national road in the east of the country…. Ford said that the British government has the desire “to work jointly with the transitional government to resolve this issue in the context of resolving the political crisis in the country within the framework of the road map that he announced Prime Minister.” (Turkish Anadolu, 21/10/2021). European envoys also continued to flock to Khartoum to support Hamdok’s government and call for an end to the suffocating closure in eastern Sudan, which threatens to turn the people against the government due to food and fuel shortages and high prices.
4- This is the general framework in which the events in Sudan unfolded, and from which it becomes clear the state of dissonance, conflict, and the entrapment of the opponent initiated by the agents of America against the agents of the British and the Europeans, and all this is a preparation for the removal of the European civilian component from the scene in Sudan and the military component affiliated with America exclusively be power in Sudan, among these preparation acts are:
a- The Failed Military Coup:
The Sudanese Minister of Defense, Lieutenant-General Yassin Ibrahim 21/09/2021, announced the thwarting of a coup attempt led by Major General Abdul-Baqi Al-Hassan Othman Bakrawi, along with 22 other officers of different ranks, non-commissioned officers and soldiers. By examining this coup attempt, we find that it is artificial, as the movements of the Sudanese army sectors in Khartoum and loyal to the military leadership (Al-Burhan and Hemedti) did not suggest that the military leadership felt danger, and on the other hand, the biography of the leader of this attempt and his presence in Cairo suggests that the army leadership was in the picture about everything that happened before it happened. The leader of that coup attempt had accompanied Al-Burhan in his military service in the Bahr al-Jabal operations and accompanied Shams al-Din Kabbashi in West Darfur. (Arabic 21, 22/09/2021) These are the heads of the military leadership in the Sudanese army and the Sovereignty Council. In 2016 he was promoted to the rank of major general, i.e. during the era of President al-Bashir, and in 2018 the leadership transferred him to Khartoum, which indicates the great trust between him and the military leadership. This military leadership around Al-Bashir is the leadership of the Sovereignty Council today, meaning that this man was close and trusted to America’s top agents in the leadership of the army. The perception that his attempt at a coup was real is out of context, but it is a matter that was arranged between him and the leadership for the purposes of arranging governance before the time for the supposed handover of the leadership of the Sovereignty Council to civilians. This perception does not change anything, that this man was declaring his lack of harmony with the Rapid Support Forces and he was accused in the year 2020 of insulting their leader, Hemedti. Moreover, this man left for Cairo to perform a surgical operation to amputate part of his leg, and returned to Khartoum only about five days before the alleged coup attempt!
b- The Disturbances of Eastern Sudan
In order to erupt the atmosphere against Hamdok’s government or the civilian component of the Sovereignty Council, protests were launched in eastern Sudan, which began on 17/09/2021 in Port Sudan, which quickly spread; leading to the closure of the entire eastern Sudan of the ports, fuel pipelines, and the “national” road connecting with the capital, Khartoum. The movement of commercial trucks stopped, and the name of the High Council of Beja Nazir and Independent Chieftains, led by Muhammad Al-Amin Tirik, who began to announce his harsh and impossible conditions on Hamdok’s government, to lift his “siege on Khartoum and the rest of Sudan” became apparent.
As for the indications that this wide and complete closure was concocted, it is that it started on 17/09/2021 in protest against the Juba Agreement, which encroach on the rights of eastern Sudan and signed with armed groups, some of which were fighting for the rights of that region, but the signing of that agreement was in October 2020, i.e. about a year ago, and at the time, these protests did not emerge with this deadly momentum. Thus, they are made up due to the fact that they did not coincide with the signing of the agreement. As for the fact that the military component was behind these protests, it is that Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan described them as “political” and said: The issue of the closure in eastern Sudan is political… and it must be dealt with politically (The Independent Arabia, 30/09/2021), meaning that the army is disavowing its responsibility to solve this crisis even though it is a security issue by nature and affects the lives of almost the entire Sudanese people.
c- Demanding the Dissolution of the Government and the Suspension of Meetings in the Sovereignty Council;
The eruption, led by the military component, intensified and the demands to dissolve the government increased. These demands are no longer from political forces and demonstrators, but from the military component of the Sovereignty Council. After the mechanisms of partnership between the military and civilian component were frozen after the coup attempt, the military component attacked its civilian counterpart. According to Al-Sharq news channel, Al-Burhan told soldiers at Khartoum’s Bahri Military District yesterday, that that any political solution for Sudan needs to first start with “dissolving the current government” adding “there is no solution to the current crisis in the country except by dissolving the current government and expanding the overall political base of the parties participating in the transition government.” (Asharq Al-Awsat, 12/10/2021) Likewise, (The Sudan Tribune website reported that Sudanese Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok rejected a request from the President of the Sovereign Council, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and his deputy, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti) to dissolve the current government and appoint a new government in its place. While two sources from the Council of Ministers confirmed that the crisis between the military and civilian components has returned to square one of disputes. The Sudan Tribune website, quoting multiple sources, stated “the president of the Sovereign Council and his deputy asked Hamdok – in a meeting in which the three officials met yesterday, to discuss the political crisis in the country – to dissolve his government and replace it with another government. In addition, Al-Burhan asked to freeze the activity of the committee to dismantle the dismissed regime, known locally as the Empowerment Removal Committee. (Al Jazeera Net, 15/10/2021)). Also (Hamdouk described the ongoing political tensions in the country the worst and most dangerous crisis facing the transitional government, after the departure of the previous regime. He called on all parties to unite so that the country would not be dragged into chaos. (BBC, 18/10/2021)).
With these escalating events over the past two months, it became clear that the military component led by Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and his deputy, Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), had pushed the transitional phase into uncertainty. Hemedti said in a statement, “The handing over of the presidency of the Sovereignty Council to civilians is premature, and is not among the agenda at the moment,” adding that “the portrayal of what is happening now is because of the imminent handover of the council to civilians is a lie and a shame” (Arabi 21, 8/10/2021).
Second: The division of [the Forces of] Freedom and Change:
What troubles Hamdok’s government is that the Forces of Freedom and Change that brought Hamdok as prime minister have begun to split and two factions have emerged in them; the Charter of National Accord faction, which began to see that the problem is in Hamdok’s government. (A leader of the Forces for Freedom and Change – Charter of National Accord, Minni Arko Minawi, said that the real crisis in Sudan is within the Alliance for Freedom and Change. (Al Jazeera Net, 20/10/2021)), Another faction became known as the Central Council of the Forces for Freedom and Change, which represents the Sudanese Congress, the National Umma Party, the Federal Gathering and the Arab Baath Party. While the first faction held an open sit-in in front of the Council of Ministers, demanding the dissolution of the government and the resignation of Hamdok, recalling the sit-ins in 2019 against the Bashir regime, the second faction organized demonstrations to demand the handover of power to civilians according to the constitutional document.
One question remains: whether some agents of the British and the European have changed their allegiance, and the talk is specifically about Jibril Ibrahim, the leader of the Justice and Equality Movement and the current Minister of Finance in Hamdok’s government, as well as Minni Arko Minawi, the governor of the Darfur region. Examining this, it becomes clear that:
1- The Minister of Finance, Jibril Ibrahim, had the trust of the English agent Abdullah Hamdok, who appointed him as Minister of Finance in the new formation of his government on 8th February 2021, and before that, i.e. mid-2019, the Qatari embassy was defending him during the crisis of his deportation from Ethiopia 21/07/2019. Before that, he was with his brother Khalil, who was killed by the Sudanese army in an air raid. He was one of the founders of the Justice and Equality Movement in Darfur and an opponent of the leader of the Janjaweed militia, which later became the Rapid Support Forces (Hemedti) in Darfur. Britain and Europe were exploiting the forces opposing the Bashir regime in Darfur, establish contacts with them and weave relations with them to strike the Bashir regime. Before that, he had contacts with the UAE and Chad, i.e. with the English and European spheres of influence. For all of this, it is unlikely that this man leaves his long-standing relations with the British and the European men and moves to the other side, the agents of America.
2- As well as Mina Arko Minawi, he is one of the warlords in Darfur that fought the Bashir regime for two decades before he laid down his arms and pacified the authority in Khartoum to return as an assistant to Omar al-Bashir under the Abuja Agreement. Also, until recently, he was trusted by Hamdok, the current prime minister who appointed him as governor of Darfur, last May, after signing the Juba Peace Agreement. And by virtue of his tribal affiliation, he is in a long-standing animosity with America’s agent, the Vice-President of the Sovereignty Council (Hemedti).
3- Thus, it is most likely that the English cunning is what pushed these two men to the camp of the agents of America and kept them away from the camp of the agents of the British and the Europeans. Thus, Britain would have introduced two of its men in the new ruling on the way of the English in their cunning and malice.
Third: With the situation in Sudan and the malicious paths that were pushed by the agents of America and the other malicious paths that the agents of the English and the Europeans tried to take, all of which contain bloodshed, injustice, hunger and crises, the people in Sudan must investigate their situation and turn their backs on all thesefailed rulers;the agents of America, the English and the Europeans, who put the blood and capabilities of the Sudanese people at the service of these Kafir countries, so they settle their matter and unite their ranks against all these agents; there is no difference between one team and another. And they should hold firmly to the strong rope of their Lord so that they rise up agaist these and those, overthrow them, and establish the system that satisfies their Lord, an Islamic State; the Khilafah (Caliphate) on the method of the Prophethood. And the people of Sudan are worthy of all this good that preserves their blood, unites their ranks and expels the influence of the Kuffar from their country.
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And that day the believers will rejoice, In the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful.” [Ar-Rum: 4-5].
18th Rabi’ Al-Awwal 1443 AH – 25/10/2021 CE