MinBane

I write what I like.

Archive for the category “Diplomacy”

Sudanese Professional Association: The Situation Regarding the Dialogue with the Transitional Military Council (22.04.2019)

On yesterday, the 21st of April, the Forces of the Declaration of Freedom and Change (DFC) announced that they are stopping all forms of communication with the Transitional Military Council (TMC). This happened after the TMC called for a meeting to question the intention of the DFC forces to announce the names of its candidates for the civilian sovereign council and the transitional cabinet. The TMC conveyed that it received over a hundred proposals on how to formulate the the interim government and it will study all of them to proceed forward. The TMC clearly expressed that it does not recognize the DFC forces as the representative of the protestors in the sitdown strike (sit-in) and that it considers other forces – forces that include allies of the deposed regime – as legitimate partners in the transitional period. We in the SPA categorically reject this manipulation of the dialogue process and consider it a wicked play from the political committee assigned by the TMC to run the dialogue. This committee is comprised of members who are figures from the previous regime, and its head (Omer Zain Elabdin) was the head of the National Congress Party (NCP) within the army. Zain Elabdin is trying his best to bring back the deposed regime from the window after Sudanese people rejected it in the widest popular referendum. The committee also includes Jalal Eldin Elshiekh the deputy director of the infamous National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) and Eltayeb Babiker, the force behind the infamous public order framework.

Another trick attempted by the TMC political committee is the false framing of the DFC forces as being not ready and fragmented. However, the DFC forces have discussed the three tiers of government and submitted a full proposal of transition to the security council and discussed the proposed names. Many of the political forces in the DFC coalition announced that it will not participate in the interim government and will be committed to nominating a list of professional qualified names for the cabinet.

The main issue of conflict with the TMC is the nature of the sovereign council. While the TMC insists on a fully military council, the DFC forces propose a civilian council with military representation to act as the sovereign head of state in the country.

This statement is to convey the current situation of the current political process in Sudan. The dialougue process is being manipulated by the political committee of the TMC in an attempt to circumvent this revolution and preventing it from achieving its full objectives, but we assure the Sudanese people and the world that as we were victorious in our battle, we shall be glorious in our times of peace.

The foreign relations committee

The Sudanese Professionals Association

Advertisements

Somalia: Jubaland Council for Change – Jubaland Election Dilemma and Current Trends (16.04.2019)

African Union: Communiqué of the 840th meeting of the PSC on the situation in Sudan (15.04.2019)

Security Council Renews Mandate of United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei to Continue Supporting Joint Border Verification Mechanism – Resolution 2465 (2019) – (12.04.2019)

Sudan: Fourth (4) Progress Report of the Activities of the National Pre-Transitional Committee (NPTC) – Presented to RJMEC 5th Monthly Meeting 11. April 2019 – Juba, South Sudan (11.04.2019)

Sudan: Troika statement on the current unrest in Sudan (14.04.2019)

On April 11, the brave people of Sudan through their determined and principled call for change removed a President who had headed a brutal regime for 30 years. A new Transitional Military Council was formed on April 13, after the people decisively rejected the initial military leadership who had a close association with the former regime.

The new leader of the Transitional Military Council has pledged to turn over power to a civilian government. However, at this point, the constitution is suspended and parliament dissolved. To date, the legitimate change that the Sudanese people are demanding has not been achieved. It is vital that that the authorities listen to the calls from the Sudanese people. Most pressingly, the continuing peaceful protests must not be met with violence from any quarter. Sudan needs an orderly transition to civilian rule leading to elections in a reasonable time frame.

It is time for the Transitional Military Council and all other parties to enter into an inclusive dialogue to effect a transition to civilian rule. This must be done credibly and swiftly, with protest leaders, political opposition, civil society organizations, and all relevant elements of society, including women, who are willing to participate. We also call on the Transitional Military Council to meet the needs of all people of Sudan by ensuring humanitarian access to all areas of Sudan.

Sudan needs a political system that is inclusive, respectful of human rights and the rule of law, and supported by a sound constitutional basis. We call on the Transitional Military Council to take the steps necessary to build confidence with the people by adhering to its pledge to release all political prisoners. We condemn any acts of violence by legacy forces of the former regime, such as the Popular Defense Forces, the Popular Police Forces, and other militias. We urge Sudan’s new leadership to take the steps necessary to build domestic and international support to help resolve Sudan’s many pressing challenges.

IGAD Statement on Sudan (12.04.2019)

Bachelet urges Sudan authorities to protect human rights and rule of Law (12.04.2019)

Bachelet reiterated the readiness of the UN Human Rights Office to strengthen its engagement with Sudan to advise and assist the State in discharging fully its human rights obligations.

GENEVA, Switzerland, April 12, 2019 – UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet on Friday reminded the authorities in Sudan of their overarching duty to ensure the protection of the human rights of all people and to refrain from the use of violence.

“This is a very critical, volatile moment for Sudan and there is deep uncertainty and unease about the future,” Bachelet said. “We are closely monitoring developments and call on the authorities to refrain from using force against peaceful protestors, and to ensure that security forces and judicial authorities act in full accordance with the rule of law and Sudan’s international human rights obligations.”

The High Commissioner appealed for calm and called on the authorities to release all those detained for their exercise of the freedom of peaceful assembly and expression.

“The crisis in Sudan has its roots in human rights grievances – economic, social, civil and political rights. The solution must also be grounded in human rights,” she said. “I call on the Government to address the people’s demands. There needs to be a concerted effort, with the meaningful participation of civil society, to work to resolve these grievances.”

She also stressed the need for independent, prompt and effective investigations into the excessive use of force against protestors since December last year.

Bachelet reiterated the readiness of the UN Human Rights Office to strengthen its engagement with Sudan to advise and assist the State in discharging fully its human rights obligations.

African Union Chairperson Mahamat: Is he flipping a coin to see if a military coup is okay?

To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”Thomas Paine

I don’t know, the former Chadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Moussa Faki Mahamat, whose the African Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union. However, he has a rare strike of confidence. Surely after today, he should explain himself. Not because I am directly against the man, but because his perspective on the military takeover, coup d’etat in Zimbabwe in 2017 and Sudan in 2019. Is strikingly similar, but his response is differing.

Both was actions done against 30 years of rule by one person in each republic. The African Union have supported their reign and never imposed anything on the member nations. However, today the revolution of Sudan is put in another pile, than what happen in Zimbabwe. We can see how the Chairperson of the AU is acting differently. In a manner, where his vision doesn’t coincide.

Just take a look!

The African Union recognizes that the Zimbabwean people have expressed their will that there should be a peaceful transfer of power in a manner that secures the democratic future of their country. President Mugabe’s decision to resign paves the way for a transition process, owned and led by the sovereign people of Zimbabwe” (African Union – ‘Statement of the Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union on the Situation in Zimbabwe’ 21.11.2017).

The Chairperson expresses the African Union conviction that the military take-over is not the appropriate response to the challenges facing Sudan and the aspirations of its people” (African Union – ‘Statement of the Chairperson of the Commission on the Situation in Sudan’ 11.04.2019).

I don’t know if there is deep grudges between Mahamat and General Awad Mohamed Ahmed Ihn Ouf of Sudan or there are was a friendly relationship between Mahamat and General Constantino Chiwenga of Zimbabwe.

Because, his tone is vastly different. Both these men did similar fashion to take power. The Coup that wasn’t Coup in Harare in November 2017. While the Coup, that is currently a State of Emergency in Sudan. They are viewed differently by the African Union and their Chairperson. That is showing with the use of words and the protocol that the AU is sending the Republic’s way.

The Zimbabwean new leadership got a friendlier tone, as they used the military and installed new transitional government in 2017. While the Sudanese are getting a more hostile tone for starting to have a Military Transitional Council for two years before elections. This is done in the same fashion and with use of power by the same party as of the deposed leaders in both Republics.

The Sudanese are getting rid of Al-Bashir and starts a transitional phase by the same leadership. While the Zimbabwean did the same in 2017 and had a transitional government until the elections of 2018. Alas, it was okay in Harare, the AU had no trouble with the military intervention or at disposal in Zimbabwe. But the same Union are not impressed by what Ahmed Ihn Ouf done in Khartoum today. Still, it was fine just mere two years ago?

I don’t like a bloodless coup, its good every time a dictator and a tyrant has fallen, but the whole system has to re-invented and also restructured for a civilian rule of some kind. Not a government run by the army. Then the votes, the ballots and the will of the people will not be respected. That is why the change in Khartoum right now is only skin-deep.

The same, which happen in Harare, where the same fashion of ZANU-PF continues to linger on. There was only a change of head, but not of their operations nor their way of expression power. The same is trying to appear in Khartoum. Surely, the NCP will not let go easily. Even if the public continues to demonstrate. They will do whatever it takes to prolong their rule.

That is why, the AU could have been a useful tool, but this is usually the Dictators Club in Addis Ababa. That is why, their statements is not believable. Nevertheless, in this regard, their statement can be questioned, because of how vastly different it was comparing similar efforts in two different countries. That from the same Mahamat, whose seen both things occur within his time in the chair.

There are contrasts and difference in how these two military coup d’etat have appeared, as they happen in realms, which is not to similar in fashion. Even if both was bolstered by the army and needed their blessing to rule. Still, the Mugabe and the Al-Bashir reign ended abruptly by the force of the soldiers, who kept them in power for so long.

Now, the dictator club of Addis lost one more member and surely, will soon get a new face. Wonder, if Mahamat is ready to explain, why he accept the incident in Harare, but questioned the one in Khartoum? Peace.

African Union: Statement of the Chairperson of the Commission on the Situation in Sudan (11.04.2019)

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: