President Al-Burhan and “Emptying the Circle” (3/3)

As I See

Adil El-Baz

1
At the outset of this final installment, it is necessary to define what the “Dignity Alliance” actually is, to avoid any misunderstanding of this broad coalition. The Dignity Alliance is not a traditional political organization or a partisan coalition. Rather, it is a broad national front composed of a diversity of forces united under the banner of the Sudanese Armed Forces, with one common goal: liberating the homeland and protecting it from collapse. This diversity is the source of its strength, but also a constant test of its unity and national commitment.

2
In the previous article, I stopped at the second circle, which includes the armed movements as well as the Islamist alliance fighting under the army’s banner (the so-called “Innocents”), and others who have rallied to fight alongside the army in defense of their homeland.

The Islamist component within the Dignity Alliance is under constant attack. Accusations are ever ready—claiming that these warriors, who have descended onto the battlefield with hearts of light and steel and sacrifice their finest youth each day for martyrdom, are not seeking paradise, but rather temporary seats of power! Strangely, opposition trolls endlessly promote this falsehood. God knows, and the people know, that they are lying—yet they still find listeners! And their lies extend beyond the local scene to the regional and international levels, with some of the very countries that declare war on the Islamists also actively promoting and politically exploiting this narrative.

The aim is to pressure the army’s leadership into pushing the Islamists out of the battlefield, or for the Islamists to become disillusioned and withdraw from the fight under the army’s banner—thus emptying yet another circle of the Dignity Alliance, removing thousands of fighters from the war effort. Certain actors are actively working to see that happen. Some even push the army to take that decision, while others are working from within the Islamist camp, sowing doubt by asking foolish questions like: Why are we fighting when we have no guarantees that we won’t be sold out at the next political bargaining table, with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the “Qahd” trolls returning to power while we alone pay the price?

The truth is: the Islamists are fighting for their homeland—and for their very existence. If the RSF wins this war, and the Emirates impose their agenda, only God knows what will become of them, or of the country as a whole.

3
Then there is the third circle: political forces and mobilized citizens who have stood behind the army from the very first moment of the war, remaining a solid pillar of support. For the first time, the world has seen nearly all segments of the Sudanese people united, chanting: “One people, one army.” This unity has been forged in the fire of war and has remained unshaken despite all the tragedies the country has endured—killings, displacement, city occupations, even genocide. What an incredible unity, one the country has not witnessed in recent history.

All the political, social, and religious factions—except a few—stand united behind their armed forces: “In hardship, we reveal our might.” It’s a story worthy of reflection and celebration.

And now, this emotionally united circle must be emptied. How? Through internal disputes and greed; through the state’s neglect of these political forces and mobilized groups, making them feel irrelevant, unheard, unvalued—even excluded from decisions that directly concern them. The resulting disillusionment, stoked by internal and external whispers, could lead to fragmentation. Some may begin to salivate over the promise of foreign gold and sell out cheaply—just as many others have in this age.

4
It is both reassuring and gratifying that President Al-Burhan is fully alert to the conspiracy to empty this circle. He has thwarted—and continues to thwart—attempts by malevolent actors to dismantle it. The most recent example occurred just last week, when he wisely resolved a conflict over ministerial posts allocated to participating armed movements, shutting the door on sedition and sabotage.

Earlier, he foiled a plot to isolate the Islamists when he declared, “The entire people are fighting alongside us,” and dismissed the discourse about Islamists as mere scaremongering. Notably, his description of the “Islamist card” as a “bogeyman” was no passing remark—it was a precise expression of his understanding of how certain regional and international actors attempt to portray the Islamists as a threat. This is not merely to marginalize them, but to provoke the army and mislead the international community about the true nature of the conflict. The bogeyman, in this case, is not a real threat, but a tool of political and media pressure designed to fracture national unity and sow division within the Dignity Alliance.

In another statement, on February 13, 2025, during a visit to the Omdurman Military Zone, General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, President of the Transitional Sovereign Council and Commander-in-Chief of the Army, declared: “The Armed Forces will not abandon anyone who took up arms and fought alongside us in the Dignity War. They will be partners in any political project. We will exclude no one.” He added: “We will remain committed to those who fought with us, regardless of their affiliations, until the country is fully cleansed.”

5
As for the political forces, President Al-Burhan has met with them at several conferences. Despite their internal disputes and shortcomings, he listened to them with patience. Ultimately, they reached consensus and presented a unified proposal—one that is now bearing fruit in the form of preparations for a civilian government. The President has shown genuine respect for their voices. As the state institutions are now being rebuilt, their voice must be institutionalized, especially through a parliament in which they play a substantial role in the governance of the country.

As for the mobilized civilian volunteers, President Al-Burhan has consistently praised their efforts in his speeches. He provided them with abundant arms and regularly visits their camps, as he did recently in Dongola.

6
If President Al-Burhan is alert to the trap of “emptying the circle” and committed to preserving the cohesion of the Dignity Alliance, then others within his orbit must rise to the same level of responsibility. The President must not be made to feel that those closest to him are nothing more than sources of noise and friction—full of petty complaints and boundless ambitions. Instead of aiding him, they risk becoming a burden on the state—seemingly oblivious to the magnitude of the responsibilities he bears and the daunting tasks awaiting him in a country on the edge of disintegration, besieged by regional and international malevolence—not aimed at toppling Al-Burhan or his government, but at toppling the state itself.

The resilience of Sudan’s state amid this storm depends not only on the President’s awareness, but on the vigilance of those around him—their ability to rise above trivial disputes and personal agendas, to prioritize national interests over narrow factional ones, and to cultivate patience and unity in the face of peril.

7
President Al-Burhan remains the one steering the country’s course, and thus his responsibilities are greater than ever. In these critical times, he must summon deep reserves of patience, commensurate with the magnitude of this historical moment. He must endure the petty and the profound, contain crises, and guard against the “emptying of the circle.” No doubt, many whisperers and rumor-mongers—serving either their own interests or those of foreign patrons—will continue their relentless efforts, using the media, whispers in the President’s ear, open incitement, and manufactured chaos to push him toward decisions that would unravel the Dignity Alliance, empty the circle, and ultimately bring down the nation—not just Al-Burhan or his government.

The President must hold fast to the strategic patience for which he is known.

8
Any slide toward emptying these circles of their national essence—belittling their sacrifices and downplaying their stances—would only reproduce the fragility of the state and rewind the clock to the moment of collapse.
The post-war phase is no less dangerous than the war itself. In fact, it is the greater test: do we have the will to remain united after our victory?
What Sudan needs today is a new national covenant—one that transcends alliances and spoils, and reestablishes Sudanese unity on the foundation of genuine partnership and mutual sacrifice.
Can we do that before the nation empties itself of everything?