CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
|
Sudan |
ISLAM
Two different interpretations of Islam: the Government’s and the ordinary people’s...
In Sudan there are two types of Islam. One is that of the common people, mostly of Arab descent, and the other — that of the present regime — is a fake and bloodletting. The ordinary citizen’s Islamic religion gives no problem. The common people are pious and they respect other religious traditions. They are ready to co-exist and to learn from other religions.
But the Islam of Sudan’s regime, a politicised Islam, is used to cripple the Opposition in order to stay in power and to amass the national wealth for itself. It has also begun to show some features of racism, and this new element has led to a genocidal war against the Sudanese of African descent, regardless of whether they are Muslims or not. Even black Muslims are called «infidels.»
The Islam of Sudan’s present regime is oppressive. It has caused the death of over two million people. How can any state which describes itself as being religious, bomb its own citizens or commit human rights violations such as the extrajudicial elimination of its own civilians, simply because they dare to speak their mind?
Yildiz is a representative from the Germany-based Alliance of Islamic Communities. He is also the advisor for the Qurban (Islamic gifts) and Dialogue Program, which strives to reach out to poor populations in different parts of the world, especially during the festive periods in the Muslim Calendar. Following a fact-finding mission to Rumbek, a Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) controlled area in southern Sudan, his testimony is revealing. He states: «The root cause of the current conflict in Sudan, transcends the religious realm, contrary to the picture often created in Europe. My fellow Muslims in Rumbek feel as oppressed by the Sudanese government as members of other religious groups. Muslims in Rumbek support the struggle for the south’s self-determination».
The racial factor
It is crystal clear that the root cause of Sudan’s civil war is injustice. If the so-called Islamic regime is really implementing an Islamic program, why should Muslims of Black African descent be oppressed and discriminated against? The imposition of the Sharia on a multi-religious society can best be described as a form of religious apartheid.
Numerically, Sudanese of African descent outnumber Sudanese of Arab descent. But given the fact that the Arabs in the north inherited power from the British, they want to continue to rule perpetually. To guarantee that, they have to resort to what they describe as «religion».
They seem to be succeeding, not because Muslim citizens in the north are willing to go along with this way of thinking and acting, but because most Muslims of African descent are illiterate and lack political awareness. In western Sudan, most of the people are Africans and almost all of them are Muslims. A great number of them have never seen a blackboard. A simple call like «Alla wa Akhbar» (i.e. «God is great»), is enough to earn loyalty. But they are unable to understand if this loyalty is religious or political? Western Sudan, in spite of being almost one hundred percent Muslim (and so, one would have thought, receiving every help for education from Sudan’s Muslim masters), is the most backward area in the country (followed by eastern and southern Sudan). Development has been concentrated in the centre. Both Khartoum and Medani are in the central part of the country.
The economic factor
Sudan is wrongly listed as being among the least developed countries in the world. There are huge untapped resources here. «Recently, shortly after the lifting of the ban on Sudanese livestock exports to the Gulf States, Sudan was able to export 625,000 sheep, earning the equivalent of more than 44 million US dollars,» the editorial of the Khartoum Monitor, one of the two English-language dailies in the country, reported. The editorial went on to comment that, «with such lucrative business, Sudan can hardly be categorized as a poor country considering that we also have other good hard currency earners such as oil, gold, gum Arabic, sugar, and simsim» If we were to put these returns to useful purposes, our standard of living would rise tenfold. This will mean less social frustration, leading to fewer crimes, and decrease in political dissidence. But how can we make sure that this money doesn’t disappear from government hands? Maybe we should make the custodians of the national treasury wear pocketless trousers and shirts,» concluded the paper.
Every day, more than 500 barrels of crude oil are sold. But you still find beggars on the streets of Khartoum. The beggars are mostly people from southern Sudan, the Nuba Mountains and the Ingessana Hills in eastern Sudan. Citizens are impoverished whilst living in the midst of plenty.
The Khartoum Monitor‘s editorial is somewhat economical with the truth. It doesn’t point out that the national treasury caters for those who profess the religion of the state. And even these particular men and women are divided off into many classes. «First class citizens» are Muslims of Arab descent who concur with the regime’s brand of Islam. «Second class citizens» are Black African Muslims who have accepted the Regime’s interpretation of Islam. Other groups follow in descending order. Make no mistake, the colour of skin matters a lot.
The rift that occurred between Dr. Hassan Abdalla Al Turabi, Sudan’s Islamic ideologue, and Omer El-Bashir, brought the racial agenda that was hidden behind the Islamic curtain, to the surface. Turabi himself wrote a book entitled, «The Black Book.» That book, banned by the regime, revealed the manner with which all successive Islamist governments have been racially inclined, whilst hiding under the cloak of Islam.
The call for self-determination
«Long before Sudan got her independence, the British Administrators and the Arabs connived to ensure the fate of southern Sudan,» says Abel Alier, a former vice-president and a lawyer. Alier was leader of the Southern Front Party (SFP) which was fighting for more autonomy for southern Sudan. He said southerners were alleged to have opted for unity with the north during the 1947 Juba Conference. But southern Sudanese regarded the Conference as a consultative meeting, organized to test the reactions of southerners to the 1946 Memorandum on Southern Policy. «The District Commissioner of Gogrial, a town in southern Sudan, resigned in protest, due to the division of the British administrators on the question of southern Sudan», he said. That means the people of the south were not given the chance to decide for themselves.
The British Civil Secretary, Sir James Robertson, disputed the argument that southerners had accepted unity during the 1947 Conference. He stated that, «I looked upon the Conference solely as a means of finding out the capability of the southerners, and it was therefore quite inaccurate for some people to say that at the Juba Conference, the southern representatives had agreed to come in with the north. No decision could made by the Conference, since members had no mandate from their peoples.»
And we must not forget that southerners depended on their local tribal chiefs who had never seen a blackboard in their lives, to represent them. Meanwhile, people, some of whom had already earned doctoral degrees in different disciplines, represented the northerners.
In a joint letter dated 10 March 1947, Mr. Hunter (one of the British Administrators) and his colleagues in Wau (a town in southern Sudan), deplored the minutes of the Conference. They said that «these minutes give the impression that the future of the southern Sudan is being discussed by the wrong men in the wrong milieu, and that the government’s decision is likely to be thereby directed into wrong channels.»
1995 was very much a year when attempts were made to mediate between the warring parties. In January, under the auspices of the Inter-Governmental Organisation on Development (IGAD), a meeting was called, but, as on previous occasion, the talks failed. In mid-year, a group of western powers tried to persuade IGAD to resume its mediation and in May of the same year, Kenya’s President Moi persuaded Sudan to declare a two-month extension to the ceasefire (announced in March by President El-Bashir), but military action flared again in the south. A meeting of opposition exiles was held in June 1995, when three opposition groups joined a revived National Democratic Alliance. The opposition was given the former Sudanese embassy in Asmara, Eritrea, as its headquarters.
The right to self-determination
Once the government realized that the southerners were serious about self-determination, it began to back off trying to reach a compromise with the south, by resorting to other initiatives such as the joint Egyptian-Libyan initiative. This initiative does not include the southerners’ right to self-determination.
Sudan is an ethnic and religious mosaic, and is divided along two seemingly irreconcilable people, with an African people in southern Sudan whose cultures are different from the people who claim an Arab identity. This diversity has made the task of building one united country, well nigh impossible.
During the Ecumenical Forum held in London from 4-6 March 2002, Sudanese Church leaders issued a communique, appealing to the international community to help in ending Sudan’s civil war, by organizing a referendum on self-determination for the southerners. Such a referendum would determine how southern Sudanese relate with their northern compatriots. «Our suffering people should be allowed to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development. We believe that nobody is wise or knowledgeable enough to make choices for them», said the church leaders in their concluding communique
Signatories to this document were Archbishop Paolino Lukudu Loro of Juba, who is also President of the Sudan Catholic Bishops’ Conference; Archbishop Joseph Marona, Primate of the Episcopal Church of Sudan; Rev. Peter Makuac Nyak, Associate Moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Sudan; Rev. Taban Elonai Darago, Chairman of the Sudan Council of Churches (SCC) and Father Mark Kumbonayki, Chairman of the New Sudan Council of Churches (NSCC).
The communique stated: «To-date, over 2.9 million Sudanese have lost their lives; over 4 million are displaced, thousands maimed and wounded; millions are widowed and orphaned. And there is no way of determining the cost in terms of losses to education, services and development. Enough is enough».
The leadership of the Southern Sudan Students Union (SOSSU) has also written an open letter to the British Government. Their letter was in support of the right to self-determination. «The IGAD Declaration of Principles should be the main forum for the quest for peace. Hence, any peace initiative which excludes the IGAD initiative, is a waste of effort and resources. The Government of Sudan has tried much to avoid the IGAD peace initiative because it includes the right to self-determination for southern Sudan. This has been shown by its support for the Libyan-Egyptian initiative, which does not acknowledge the UN-recognized right to self-determination».
ENGLISH CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
PeaceLink 2002 - Reproduction authorised, with usual acknowledgement