Sudan’s options aren’t open ended

As I see it

By Adil El-Baz
1
The Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated in conclusion of its statement issued Saturday, while commenting on IGAD’s invitation to the rebel Hemedti, that “Sudan’s options remain open towards IGAD in light of the authority’s insistence to repudiate its foundation system which is in line with international law, to accept being a tool for conspiracy against Sudan and its people.”
Well, the truth is, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has to know that there are no open ended options for it. Rather, it has only one option, and it moves towards one direction that leads to exiting from this locusts-chasing organization, which always has a locust in its mouth.!! The reasons listed in the statement are sufficient to take a position befitting Sudan. If there is an organization that grants legitimacy to rebel leaders in Africa to participate in the IGAD Heads of State Summit, what remains of the sovereignty of states? What self-respecting country can be a member of an organization that hosts at the summit of its leaders a terrorist organization that plunders, kills, rapes and commit genocidal violations and then accept that its leaders to address the heads of that organization at a summit meeting??

2
if we recount the positions of this organization towards Sudan since the outbreak of the war, we will reach one conclusion: that this organization has become a political support for the rebellion, used by the rebellion and its sponsors to implement their agenda against the Sudan. If our response had been robust from day one, the organization would not have dared to invite a rebel like Hemedti to participate in the summit (Hemedti announced in his tweet that he had received an invitation from the IGAD secretariat to attend and participate in the same summit, and his acceptance of participation in the forty-second special session of the Council of Heads and Governments of IGAD countries). This is a historical precedent that has never happened in soil of this continent. This organization never invited John Garang, the man whom all of Africa supported. No organization ever invited him to participate in its summits. How could IGAD do that now, had it not exploited the situation of war and exploited our meek attitude vis a vis people and the fatal slowness in our responses? Our reactions toward our policies and its actions against us.
3
An organization that calls on its heads of state for regional military intervention in an internal conflict, and they call for the disarmament of the Sudanese army, and they open halls and platform within their countries to run political and media campaigns against Sudan, and open their airports to transport equipment and weapons to the rebels in broad day light, and then they provide a red carpet reception for the rebels as if they were heads of state. Imagine if the Sudan had invited General Debretsion Gebremichael leader of the rebel movement against the Ethiopian government in the Tigray region. What would the Ethiopian reaction be?
4
An organization that dares to falsify Sudan’s positions in its official final communique and fails to apologize. An organization that disdains the President of Sudan when it invites him to meet with a rebel and then apologizes for shelving the meeting for technical reasons. The rebel does as he likes travelling in his plane to the capitals of the same countries at the same time. The latest episode of its conspiracy is to invite the leader of the Janjaweed, who committed war crimes and genocide, to participate in a summit reserved for presidents, against its law and charters and against any diplomatic custom. Our trade balance with its members does not reach $200 million (we import coffee and ginger from Ethiopia and Uganda, and tea from Kenya.). What is the reason that makes us keen to join an organization that is openly conspiring against our homeland?

5
President Al-Burhan did well when he turned down an invitation for participating in this puppet theater set up in Kampala, January 18, but it is a step and must be followed by two additional steps. The first is related to rejecting any other platform as an alternative to the Jeddah platform, in order to deny the conspirators a chance for business in between initiatives, and then the Jeddah platform has its obligations. It is clear and internationally recognized, so why should we run after the locust-chasing entities and give them roles they do not deserve, and under the banner of African organizations, when in reality they are organizations that live on Western aid and obey western orders, and their representation of Africa is pure illusion. The second step that befits us is to leave this organization altogether and immediately, as Eritrea did before. Yet there is no apocalypse in Eritrea and Eritrea was not ostracized within Africa. After this inventory, it is better for us to leave this organization and let it fight with its locusts and let us focus our efforts to fighting the conspirators, both at home and abroad.