Why Do We Call For an all-inclusive dialogue?

Minni Arko Minawi

Following the World War II, the world took a new trend in which the policy of imposing influence to control resources emerged as an alternative to traditional colonialism. And, Since the countries of Africa gained their independence, they began to establish themselves constitutionally with the consent of their people regarding the definition of the state, its elements, resources, identity and system of government.
From the womb of this compromise, countries were founded, stabilized, grew, prospered, and caught up with development and construction.
But Sudan continued to follow the colonial approach, the unilateral, elitist approach, which is similar to the idea of (the leash); Some hold the lead and others follow behind.
This approach has been rejected since the colonial period and is the main reason for the demand for independence. The rejection continued until it ended with the establishment of an independent state in South Sudan, and now rejection and resistance continue in the east and west.
This approach was and still is very possible to avoid, with very simple policies, which is for us all to agree on a true national constitutional dialogue that leaves no one out.
The call for allowing everybody in for participation is still rejected by some of our friends with whom we worked together to establish the coalition on overthrowing the Bashir regime, where their rejection of the principle of expanding the base of participation and taking into account diversity was equal to drawing a map to reach the point of the fateful April 15th, which came as a natural outcome for all the political action that had preceded, whether it was intentional or not without, with the full and active participation of the international community.
The actual beginning of the war was on December 5, 2022, when the diplomatic missions imposed their hegemony over the national action.
We have continued to adhere to our trusted pledge, principles and strategic plan of the necessity of openness with everyone as long as we all belong to this country, in order to preserve the national unity for which we have been calling and working.
But our astonishment was great when various types of obstacles were placed before us by those who were with us. We did not think that firm convictions could be changed just as clothes are changed. They dismantled the saying (freedom is for us and for others) and erased the principles that they wrote with their own hands throughout continuous historical periods starting from National Democratic Rally, Revolutionary Front, National Consensus, New Dawn, Sudan Call.
Finally, Forces of Freedom and Change (FFC), which has, literally, adopted the Sudan Call Charter.
Before the coup that took place within FFC on April 12, 2019, immediately after the fall of Al-Bashir, they retracted to their previous attitude after having legitimized the slogans of monopolization of power, so they rushed to ally with the military, both of them the Army and Rapid Support Forces (RSF), without the slightest level of consultation with yesterday’s companions.
The hidden motive for such scramble is the subconscious political mind, to make the army a guardian of their young rule and make the RSF a hunting dog in the wilderness, blocking the entry door to the movements they see as symbols of marginality.
It is the same approach that transformed the October 1964 Revolution and turned back the people’s clock, as well as in April 1985. Thus, independence turned into exploitation.
So why do we insist on an all-inclusive dialogue?
There are traditional and modern groups, forces, organizations and national figures who now stand far away in the spectator seats. Professionals, shepherds, farmers, craftsmen, refugees, displaced rural people and civilians, all of them must have their voices heard and decide the fate of this country like others, otherwise we are promised with distorted results after the war ends.
National Bonds…Who has the right to distribute them?
The definitive answer is that there is no one who has this right, but we now see otherwise, as there are those who claim to be the agent for distributing national bonds, so that this issue has become a path of endless controversy and does not require further debate from us.
Certainly, the time is still right for us to open our hearts and extend our hands to each other for the sake of the unity of what remains of the homeland. Otherwise, we are on the verge of a historical stage in which we will see our countries completely torn apart. Let us reject those voices that aim to keep this and that away. Let us encourage the voices calling for the unity of the country’s diaspora to avoid falling into the kingdom of chaos that the English novelist William Golden mentioned in his novel Kingdom of the Flies, that empire that ended in complete chaos as a result of the absence of the heads of families.