Question:

On 5/12/2022, the media and television in Sudan broadcasted scenes of the signing of the Framework Agreement in the Republican Palace between the army represented by the army commander, the head of the Sovereign Council and his deputy, and between 52 political parties and blocs that pave the way for a transitional government for a period of two years towards general elections, with international sponsorship; especially by America, Britain and the representative of the United Nations who executed the work of the director of this agreement in the format signed. However, there is opposition to this agreement, and demonstrations took place on 8 and 9/12/2022 against the agreement. What does this agreement mean? And who benefits from it? What about the opposition to the agreement? Is it expected to last?

Answer:

In order to clarify the answer to these questions, we review the following:

First: Among the Provisions of the Agreement:

1- The agreement stipulated in the first part of it that “Sudan is a country of many cultures, ethnicities and religions,” bearing in mind that more than 96% of the people of Sudan embrace the Islamic religion (Deen), and therefore their religion (Deen) and culture are one, regardless of the number of their tribes. The agreement is a fraud and deception to distance Islam from life and the obligation to implement Islam in governance, economy, education, the social system, the penal system, domestic and foreign policy, military and industrial, and all matters of life for individuals and society.

That is why it was stated in the agreement that: “Sudan is a civil, democratic, federal, parliamentary state, in which sovereignty resides in the people and they are the source of authorities.” And all of this is contrary to Islam, as it makes Sudan a civil state, that is, a secular state that separates religion from life, and a democracy that gives the right to legislation to humans, it does not make sovereignty for Shariah and its source, Qur’an and the Sunnah, and make the state federal, which is a system of government that contradicts Islam and makes the state subject to division, and makes its regions subject to secession, as happened in southern Sudan! It seems that this agreement is intended to banish any trace of Islam in Sudan, as it was stated in it: “The state does not impose a religion on anyone, and the state is impartial with regard to religious affairs and matters of belief and conscience. It guarantees freedoms and adherence to international human rights charters, especially women’s rights charters.” I.e., these forces that drafted the agreement deliberately distanced Islam from the Muslims in this Muslim country.

2- In the second part of the agreement, it stipulated: "The transitional authority will be handed over to a full civilian authority ... and the state has a president with honorary duties ... then an executive level, headed by a civilian prime minister chosen by the signatories to the agreement, in addition to a legislative council and another for security. The defense is headed by the prime minister and includes the leaders of the regular services and armed struggle movements that signed the Juba Peace Treaty. It stipulates that: “The army distances itself from politics and the practice of economic, commercial, and investment activities, and that the Rapid Support Forces and the Armed Movement Forces are integrated into the army according to arrangements to be agreed upon later in the Merger and Demobilization Commission within a security and military reform plan that leads to a single professional and national army.” It stipulates: "Implementation of the Juba Peace Agreement ... and the completion of peace with the non-signatory armed movements." It stipulates "launching a comprehensive process for constitution-making, under the supervision of the Constitution-making Commission, for dialogue and agreement on constitutional foundations and issues, with the participation of all regions of Sudan." It also stipulates: "Organizing an inclusive electoral process at the end of a transitional period of 24 months starting from the date of appointment of the prime minister.”

Second: Local Positions:

1- The army commander and the head of the Sudanese Sovereign Council, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, indicated this during the signing ceremony of the agreement, saying, "We are committed to the military institution's final exit from the political process, holding elections at the end of the transitional period, and implementing the issues raised in the framework agreement... The country is going through exceptional circumstances." "We have been in a state of disharmony between the political and military forces. This negatively affected the country. We seek to transform the army into a constitutional institution far from any bias to a party, group or ideology," and his deputy, Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo, said, "The signing of the political framework agreement represents the beginning of a new phase and wonderful in the history of the Sudanese state. Since the beginning of the transitional period in August 2019, there have been disagreements between the components of the transition and wrong political practices that led to what happened on October 25. It is also a political mistake that opened the door to the return of the counter-revolutionary forces.

Therefore, the priorities of the next government must be implementing the Juba Agreement, completing peace with the non-signatory movements, working for the return of the displaced and refugees to their villages of origin, and addressing land problems and nomadic issues.” (SUNA Official Agency, 5/12/2022), this agreement saves the military leadership headed by Al-Burhan, his deputy, and those with them from their predicament, as people now reject their rule, and there is no internal support for them, and the military leadership is guaranteed immunity and protection from prosecution for the crimes they have committed, and they escape punishment. They were unable to manage the affairs of the country and failed to solve its problems. All they did was preserving American influence after the fall of their peer Omar Al-Bashir in agency. On another note, the other side of the so-called forces of Freedom and Change and the parties that formed the government also failed to manage the country's affairs, address its problems, and secure the minimum necessities of life for the people, and all they did was to preserve the British influence in the country... and standing up to radical regime change.

2- There is opposition to this agreement, and demonstrations took place on 8 and 9/12/2022, rejecting it. Some of them are forces that are not sincere in the opposition, as they are not loyal to the Ummah and the people of Sudan, such as the Justice and Equality Movement led by Jibril Ibrahim, the Sudan Liberation Movement led by Minni Arko Minawi, and political parties allied with the forces of Freedom and Change that follow the British colonizer. Britain has established a line of return for it and forces that act as a parallel opposition. If the agreement fails, these forces move as opposition components and cover their subordination to work to lead the people who could not get rid of the domination of the American or British agents. If they get rid of one of them, they fall into the ropes of the other, and so on. The matter continues in this manner since the country was given its formal independence, and the military exit of the colonizer, but its continuation in political, intellectual, economic and other forms.

3- This agreement seems to some as if it solves the intractable crisis of governance in the country, which is the dispute between the army and the political components, in order to hand over power to the political forces and remove the army from governance and politics. It is only a dispute between agents over the seats of power, and it does not solve Sudan's economic problems in the first place, from which it suffers and for which it revolted. It does not solve the problem of governance because it is a struggle between the agents and the tools on behalf of the major powers fighting over Sudan. It cannot solve these and other problems because it was based on a corrupt and invalid foundation, that is, the separation of religion from life, the state and society, and because it is a temporary conciliation solution between the army and certain disloyal political forces affiliated with foreign powers, and because a previous agreement took place between the two parties during a transitional period and then fell with the October 25 coup, and because the issue is not the formation of a civilian government or not, this does not provide anything.. There is no guarantee that it will be achieved, because each party is conspiring against the other and is commanded by the major conflicting powers.

Third: International Positions:

1- America praised the agreement, and US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said on Twitter on 6/12/2022: "Signing a preliminary political framework agreement in Sudan is an important step towards forming a civilian government and defining constitutional arrangements to guide Sudan during a transitional period that culminates in elections." And the US State Department issued a statement on its website on 7/12/2022 stating, “We support the plans by Sudanese civilian parties and the military to hold inclusive dialogues on outstanding issues before concluding a final agreement and transferring authority to a civilian-led transitional government,” and warned against imposing sanctions on anyone who undermines the agreement, stating: “I am announcing today an expansion of the current visa restriction policy… to cover any current or former Sudanese officials or other individuals believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic transition in Sudan, including through suppressing human rights and fundamental freedoms...”  This agreement is an important step for America to preserve its influence in Sudan and prevent the fall of the military authority loyal to it under the leadership of its agents Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and his deputy Muhammad Dagalo and the likes of them.

Especially since they staged a coup against the civilian government a year and a half ago on 25/10/2021 and stopped the course of the transitional phase that took place between the two parties in an agreement signed on 21/8/2019, and it stipulated that the military would preside over the Sovereign Council for a period of 21 months, and then civilians would preside over it for 18 months. It was extended to 53 months after the Juba Agreement on 3/10/2020, so the October 25, 2021 coup came to make the British agents miss the opportunity, and prevent them from presiding over the sovereign council. This last agreement saves America's agents from falling and prosecution, and thus preserves America's influence in Sudan, it prevents the British agents from dominating everything, as they control the political milieu.

2- Britain announced, through its Minister for Africa and International Development, Andrew Mitchell, that it welcomed the agreement, saying: “The Quartet and the Troika countries welcome this important step towards a civilian-led agreement in Sudan. The United Kingdom looks forward to working closely with such a government once it is formed. We urge all actors to unite urgently in order to reach a final agreement.” (Sudan Today 6/12/2022). British Ambassador to the Security Council James Kariuki warned that “the consequences of delay in reaching a final agreement would be severe in Sudan” and expressed “Britain’s support for the next civilian government led by civilians through coordination with international partners.” He referred to “the fragile situation in a number of parts of Sudan, especially the Blue Nile region and the state of West Kordofan.” (Sudan News 6/12/2022). Britain intervenes like America directly in Sudan, and announces its support for the agreement, as it was one of the supervisors of its formulation and production alongside America through the United Nations envoy. It declares its support for the next civilian government, which is expected to be made up mostly of its agents, and has maintained its influence in the political milieu in preparation for assuming power and an attempt to destabilize the army's influence in governance and politics.

Fourth: The conclusion is that by contemplating on these current events in Sudan, it becomes clear that the international conflict in it has not changed. Rather, it is a conflict not in secret, but in the open between America, which controls Al-Burhan, his deputy and his group, on the one hand, and Freedom and Change and the parties allied with it from Britain’s agents and its followers on the other hand, and because neither of the two parties, America or Britain, has so far been unable to extend its influence in the military component and the civilian component together. Therefore, America and Britain proceeded to the agreement, as happened since the beginning of the change of Al-Bashir until their disagreement escalated on October 25, and then they returned to agreement now. It is a temporary agreement until one of the two parties is able to acquire full military and civilian influence... We have already referred to this since the beginning of Al-Burhan’s rule and to the occurrence of (the coup), as we have previously pointed out to this in the two publications:

1- We said in a previous Answer to Question issued on 23/9/2019, that is, from around the beginning of the participation of the two parties in governance, the following is stated in it regarding the agreement of the military component with the civilian component to share power: (As for what is expected, America and Britain will not coexist quietly together, as their interests are different and their local tools are linked to them. Therefore, each of the two parties will work to abort the other’s moves! From following up the current events, pondering on matters relevant to them, and scrutinizing the statements externally and locally, especially the American and European officials... it is possible outweigh the means that each of the two parties will use to harass his opponent, overpower him, and then remove him from power...), we mentioned it there, and this is what actually happened.

Then, in a later Answer to Question on 25/10/2021, we said: (...and with what the situation in Sudan has devolved into, the malicious paths pushed by American agents, and other malicious paths that British and European agents tried to take, all of which contain what they contain of bloodshed, injustice, hunger, and crises. The people in Sudan must realize their affairs and turn their backs on all these failed rulers, agents of America, the British and Europeans who put the blood and capabilities of the Sudanese people at the service of these kufur countries, so they decide on their matter and unite their ranks against all these agents.)

2- As for the questions: Will this agreement last and be implemented? This is questionable. Will it save the country? This is far-fetched because it is based on falsehood, and because it is extracted from conflicting colonial forces that agreed temporarily, and because it is signed by puppet parties that only care about power seats and positions, preserving their financial gains and earning more money. They do not care about the country and the people, nor its revival and liberation from colonialism and the grip of the colonialists. It does not even know a path to revival, and because it works for colonial parties that work to tighten their influence in the country intellectually and politically, and because these colonial parties, especially America and Britain, are struggling to extend influence in Sudan. Foreign intervention is visible to all, as foreigners were present when it was signed in the Republican Palace.

Rather, the one who drafted the agreement is a foreigner, and he is the envoy of the United Nations under the direct supervision of the Americans and the British, the two parties to the international conflict in Sudan in the name of the Quartet and in the name of the Troika. The Quartet is America and with it its agent Saudi Arabia, and Britain and with it its agent the UAE. America uses its Saudi agent to influence local parties and pay bribes. Britain also uses the Emirates for similar things for its own benefit. The Troika is America and Britain, and with them is Norway as a European party that has no influence except when necessary, and secret talks often take place there in its capital, Oslo, which is notorious for cooking up secret agreements before their production. America threatens those who want to make the agreement fail with sanctions, and Britain warns of dire consequences if the agreement fails.

3- As for the German UN envoy, Volker Perthes, who satisfies the American and British conflicting parties, warns of the failure of the agreement. He said in a briefing to the UN Security Council: “With Sudan approaching a final political agreement, those who do not see support for their interests through a political settlement, they may escalate attempts to undermine the ongoing political process” (Sudanese Al-Rakuba 8/12/2022). It is a temporary agreement between the two parties, which may serve as a warrior’s break, and then the conflict will resume so that one side can win over the other. And if one party is victorious over the other, then this party will not surrender, because it will create problems in the country in the east, west, north, south, and in its heart in the capital, because it has its agents’ tools. If the country is not purified from them, the situation will not calm down, and the people will not see a glimmer of hope, nor will they taste the dignified and good life, and they will lose the happiness of both worlds. Rather, it is obligatory for every honest and sincere person to tread the path with seriousness and diligence with the workers to establish the Khilafah Rashidah (rightly-guided Caliphate) on the method of the Prophethood that the Messenger of Allah (saw) gave its glad-tidings: «ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةٌ عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ»“Then there will be Khilafah on the method of Prophethood” [Narrated by Ahmad and At-Tayalsy]

[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيم]

“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].