Sudan: negotiations result in a new political agreement

I briefly mentioned in an April post that after protests, Sudan's military had removed their dictator, Omar al-Bashir. Since then, I haven't discussed what was happening in Sudan.

I decided to take a look at the country. At least for now, it appears that the military and protestors have come to terms. There are articles up on both Al Jazeera and Foreign Policy that come to different opinions on this agreement.

First, Foreign Policy had the following negative take:

Many protest leaders say they knew they had been outmaneuvered from the start—that Sudan’s security establishment had actually defeated the country’s revolution back on April 11, the same day that the longtime dictator Omar al-Bashir was officially removed from office in the face of massive demonstrations.

Sudan’s security establishment, led by the country’s elusive former intelligence chief Salah Gosh, ousted Bashir and quickly reached out to sympathetic opposition leaders to negotiate a transition. But by steering the talks, the army preserved its status—and, for now, its dominance.



The agreement is for a joint military/civilian government until elections in 2022. The article also mentioned that the military had planned for the eventuality that the dictator would need to be removed from office.

Al Jazeera takes a more positive spin:

Omar Eldigair, a leader of the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC), an umbrella alliance of opposition groups, said the agreement "opens the way for the formation of the institutions of the transitional authority, and we hope that this is the beginning of a new era". In a statement on Friday morning, the Sudanese Professionals Association (SPA), which is part of the FFC, said the transition period would last three years and three months. "Today, our revolution has won and our victory shines," the SPA said in the statement, which was posted on its Facebook page. 

The article also states that two outside entities helped broker the negotiations: the African Union and Ethiopia.

It is interesting that an agreement between the military and civilians in Sudan has been reached (who knows how long it will actually last) while one has yet to be reached in Algeria. Both countries' protests started around the same time. Why?

One thought is that it didn't seem like Algeria was expecting protests while Sudan's military was making plans far in advance. So it sounds like Sudan's military had a better pulse of the civilian population's mood towards the government. Another thought is that in Algeria, the civilians don't wish to talk to the military while in Sudan at least some of the protest leaders ended up in negotiations with the military. Also, it appears that the protests in Sudan were turning violent. Al Jazeera writes, "Opposition medics say more than 100 people were killed in the dispersal and subsequent violence on June 3. Officials put the death toll at 62." From what I've read, the protests in Algeria are peaceful. Why might this be a difference in how quickly there is an agreement? Al Jazeera mentions that the African Union and Ethiopia brokered the peace deal. The violence of the protests might have spurred outside entities to try and force an agreement.

Of course, the big question is, will this agreement really last until 2022? Either the protests could start again (especially if there is an economic downturn) and/or the military could refuse to give up power in 2022.