Home / news / A “great achievement” and a “sad day” … echoes of normalization in the capital of the Three No’s

A “great achievement” and a “sad day” … echoes of normalization in the capital of the Three No’s

Khartoum – which was historically famous in the Palestinian issue as the capital of the Three Nos – received the normalization agreement with Israel quietly, except for objections from parties inside and outside the ruling coalition, which said it would unite against normalization.

The streets of the Sudanese capital, exhausted by queues of fuel and bread, were devoid of any manifestations of protest against establishing relations with Tel Aviv, despite the fact that Khartoum hosted one of the most important Arab summits in 1967, which was the summit that adopted “firm” decisions such as the declaration of the Three No’s “No reconciliation, no negotiation or recognition.” In Israel. “

Parties influential in the Forces of the Declaration of Freedom and Change – the ruling coalition – chose to conduct questionnaires within their leadership structures to seek opinions regarding normalization, and the result was more than 90% support for starting a relationship between Sudan and Israel.

Meanwhile, a semblance of competition arose between supporters of the military and civilians in the transitional government, with supporters of each side working on the percentage of normalization for it as an achievement.

Split rulers
Indian journalist Ezz El Din Ali Hassah tweeted, “Congratulations to the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council, Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, who undertook the difficult task of negotiating with the American administration until his effort culminated with this great breakthrough.”

# Terrorism List, WooW for Sudan, its exit from the American list of countries sponsoring terrorism.

Posted by National Congress Party – Sudan on Friday, October 23, 2020

Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok’s position on the normalization file was hesitant when al-Burhan met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Kampala last February, and a few days ago, Hamdok pledged normalization with the approval of the parliament, which has not yet been formed.

It seems that the establishment of relations between the two countries is on the way to creating a rift within the ruling coalition and perhaps redrawing the map of alliances in Sudan.

Muhammad Wadaa, a leader in the Sudanese Baath Party and the Forces for Freedom and Change, says that they will resist normalization through a broad front to resist normalization, which has begun to be formed in anticipation, and includes a civil force and influential parties from within and outside the forces of freedom and change.

In the most beautiful picture of the state of division, the leader of the nationalist Umma Party, Sadiq al-Mahdi, strongly opposes normalization, while his cousin Mubarak al-Fadil, who leads a dissident faction from the Umma Party, is one of the most prominent advocates of normalization in Sudan.

Opponents alliance
In a statement to Al-Jazeera Net, Wadaa indicates that this front that rejects normalization can be formed from the Communist Party and the National Umma Party, and it is also possible to agree with the Islamists because the position here is strategic and not tactical.

The National Umma Party headed by Al-Sadiq Al-Mahdi had threatened to withdraw its support for the Forces of Freedom and Change if a decision was taken to normalize relations with Israel, and the Baath Party hinted to take a similar step.

“The division is possible,” he said. “Normalization threatens the unity of the home front, and supporters of the transitional government will turn to opposing it.”

In context same, The leader of the Popular Congress Party, Kamal Omar Abdel Salam, revealed that his party was conducting consultations with Arab and leftist parties, the National Umma Party and a large wing of the unionists.

According to Abd al-Salam, “The Popular Congress Party, founded by the late Sheikh Hassan al-Turabi, ignored ideological differences to bring together the National Bloc against normalization.”

Transient ideology
On the other hand, Haider Al-Safi of the Republican Party considers what was announced by US President Donald Trump to reach an agreement between Sudan and Israel to establish relations as a “step to openness towards gains.”

In an interview with Al-Jazeera Net, Al-Safi believes that the great achievement is that normalization has removed Sudan from the list of states sponsoring terrorism, because Washington did not intend to do so, otherwise it would have taken this decision immediately after the revolution.

He says that if a friendly dialogue is conducted by real leaders in the two countries, much can be accomplished, because Sudan is rich in its resources and needs technology that enables it to invest its resources and integrate into the international system.

Absolutely, Al-Safi asserts that there is no alternative to peace, which in itself is a step forward, and indicates that the parties that reject the move have transient ideological links, and that the situation no longer tolerates the old visions, so the opposition of these parties will not go beyond the walls of their role.

And he advises the executive authority to hasten economic treatments related to the bread and fuel crises, so that normalization does not turn into a curse.

Normalization or relationships?
And between this and that, journalist and political analyst Magdy Abdel Aziz believes that what happened between Sudan and Israel is not normalization, but rather an agreement for the establishment of relations based on the exchange of interests, similar to relations between Turkey and Israel.

He adds to Al-Jazeera Net that Sudan can strengthen in the future and reject what he described as the “deal of the century”, and that he now has the right to demand the rights of the Palestinians, because the announced agreement is a strategic step and not a bow as some see it.

Magdy Abdel Aziz, who previously held the position of Commissioner of Omdurman Locality, indicates that the Sudanese government has endeavored to separate the two paths of normalization and remove the name of Sudan from the blacklist, but it is clear that the United States and Israel have worked to link the two tracks.

He stated that removal from the terrorism list is a deserved right, because Sudan is a country that has nothing to do with terrorism, all there is is that America used to keep it on this list as a heavy stick in the face of the previous regime, and today it no longer needs this stick as long as the system has changed.

Farha’s assassination
And Muhammad Wadaa, the leader of the Baath Party, goes in the direction Same by saying Linking the files of normalization and the list of terrorism spoiled the joy of being removed from that list, and was a poisonous injection.

He describes this day’s gentleness as a “sad day” because there is a sale of positions and obedience to unacceptable dictates. As long as its economic crises forced it to accept normalization, the government was free to submit its resignation instead of implicating the country.

“We are not with the queues, but at the time,” he says Himself “A decision of this size is not the prerogative of a transitional government … the government made a big mistake, and it is a step that will not achieve good and economic abundance.

Kamal Omar, a leader in the Popular Congress, also believed that “the government is not elected and is not authorized to print with Israel, but the kidnapped government hijacked the Sudanese position to satisfy regional and international intelligence agencies.”




Source link

Leave a Reply