The Taqaddum convention ends between hopes and doubts

4 June 2024

In a gathering for four days in Addis Ababa, around 600 Sudanese civilians opposed to the war considered how to end the conflict. Their ability to remain united, attract new entities and convince both camps to stop fighting is, however, debated.

Some 600 Sudanese civilians, joined by diplomats and NGO representatives, attended the closing ceremony of the four-day convention of the Coordination of Democratic Civil Forces, known as “Taqaddum” (meaning “progress”). “This is the broadest and most important coalition of civilians since Sudan’s independence in 1956,” says a representative of the economic sector who participated in the drafting of the “political vision” of Taqaddum, a six-page document adopted during the congress. 

The enthusiasm goes beyond these Sudanese civilians determined to put an end to the war waged by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) of General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (FSR) of General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, nicknamed “Himedti” since conflict erupted between them in mid April last year.

Canadian Meredith Preston McGhie, secretary general of the Global Centre for Pluralism and expert in peace negotiations in the East African context, described the conference as the “most inclusive process” that she has ever witnessed.

Participants with varied profiles 

Taqaddum members managed to invite varied components of Sudan’s political landscape and civil society. Invitees included farmers, artists, religious leaders, representatives of the traditional administration, and resistance committee members—volunteer groups that played a central role in the revolution of December 2018 and then in the demonstrations against the putsch of October 25, 2021. 

Military intelligence prevented several invitees from Sudan from attending from Port Sudan, resulting in a reduced attendance of approximately 500 out of 670 expected attendees. Most participants, however, came from abroad, arriving from 54 different countries. 

Since the outbreak of fighting, the two generals have, in fact, foiled mediation attempts one after the other. An American source close to the negotiations told Ayin that the Jeddah process will not likely resume, due to the lack of will on both sides. The Jeddah platform, which Washington and Riyadh were leading, appeared to be the most promising initiative, especially since two allies of the warring parties, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, had agreed to join it. Taqaddum also planned to send a delegation there to ensure that civilians had their say in the post-war period. 

International involvement
“As civilians, we are not armed. We have no other instrument than to repeat that the war helps no one and is destroying our country. It must end, and we are working on it despite everything,” said Asma Mahmoud Taha, a member of the coalition and the president of the pro-secular Republican Brotherhood Party. “We are thus engaged in a long process to help civilians to be able to put pressure on both parties. We also need the regional and international community to force the belligerents to silence their guns.” So far, the sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union on individuals and companies fueling the conflict have not had the desired effect. While Sudan continues to be relatively absent from international media headlines, competing with the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

“Taqaddum will not be able to stop the war alone,” says Kholood Khair, director of the Confluence Advisory think tank. “Its members must nevertheless raise public awareness of the complexity and urgency of the Sudanese conflict and liaise with the diplomatic community to tactfully exert increased pressure on both camps. If Abdullah Hamdok wants to play a leadership role, he should become an international ambassador for Sudan, like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy does for his country.”

Long-standing distrust

At the end of the convention, the former prime minister was elected head of the coalition. Alongside him are two vice-presidents, El Hadi Idris, the leader of the Sudan Revolutionary Front, and Houwayda Bushra, who represents the resistance committees. Siddig al-Siddig of the Umma Party was appointed Secretary-General and Hiba Abbas of the Sudan Professional Association was appointed rapporteur.

Despite the facade of unity, many youth and women remain sceptical, accusing the political elite of monopolising the benefits of the revolution that ousted former dictator Omar al Bashir in April 2019. “We need political parties that are well organised, have more experience, and have alliances,” explains Zellan Tia, a member of the Umbada Resistance Committee who helped organise the conference. “We fear that they will use us until there is a return to a democratic transition, then oust us from governance bodies,” she added. The divisions are already being felt.

According to researcher Nada Wanni, many youth and civil society representatives fear a few individuals are trying to control Tagaddum. “Members (of Tagaddum) were not consulted about major decisions,” Wanni said. 

A round table to come
Some members deplore, for example, not having been consulted regarding negotiations with the military. The attitude to adopt towards Sudan’s national army and Rapid Support Forces continues to be a matter of debate. “These politicians are trying to take a very neutral position,” notes Ibrahim Al Duma, a human rights activist who participated in the conference as an observer. “But the abuses committed by the two camps are not comparable. The army’s aerial bombardments certainly kill civilians. “But the RSF is responsible for 90% of violence against civilians.” Al Duma bases his analysis on an online platform that monitors and lists the crimes of both warring parties, to which he contributes.

This difference in appreciation was illustrated during the opening ceremony. The audience interrupted Ibrahim Darfi, the farmer’s representative, as he was denouncing the RSF’s crimes. Then, a few minutes before the start of the closing session, a fight broke out, whose video is circulating on social media. Witnesses told Ayin that a man chanted pro-RSF slogans in response to the revolutionary chants that resonated in the room, hostile to both the army and the paramilitaries. 

But Taqaddum members freely admit that they do not represent the entire population. A roundtable, therefore, is planned to allow all pro-peace entities to express themselves.  

The secularism debate

However, certain differences seem difficult to overcome, especially concerning the foundations of the future Sudan. On 18 May, former premier Hamdok signed a declaration in Kenya with two rebel groups that called for a secular, decentralised state in Sudan to be included in the next constitution.

“We realised that many political parties support the Nairobi Declaration, but they do not agree on the term “secularisation.” They prefer to talk about a state standing at an equal distance between different religions,” says Ammar Amoun, Secretary-General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement–North led by Abdelaziz Alhilou (SPLM-N). Following this signature, this armed movement sent a five-member delegation to the Taqaddum convention without joining the coalition. For his part, Siddig Tawer, a former member of the Sovereignty Council and Baath Party executive, refuses both to join Taqaddum and the soon-to-be-held round table.

“It’s just a show,” Tawer comments sceptically. “The agenda, the political vision—everything was ready before the conference. To obtain a real consensus, we must sit down together and debate, before writing the title, content, and axes step by step and collectively. How could 600 people have managed to discuss, negotiate, and produce these conclusions in just four days?”

The Communist Party and the Baath had left the Forces for Freedom and Change coalition, from which most of Taqaddum’s leaders came, well before the outbreak of war. These entities, but also many members of resistance committees and personalities from civil society, believe that the past signing of a framework agreement between civilians and the military contributed to a certain extent to plunging the country into this war, which left thousands dead and threw more than 9.1 individuals on the roads.