IGAD…The Latest Ambush

News Analysis 

Mohammed Wadaa


The IGAD communiqué is considered fabrication and forgery and is proven by summit recordings

The IGAD communiqué does not contribute to stopping the war, but rather increases the suffering of the Sudanese people as a result of war continuation

The consultations of the IGAD leaders with the rebellion could not be included in the summit communiqué because they take place outside the summit

The UAE Minister of State did not attend the summit session he was there after the end of the closing session

The Kenyan president’s alleged contact with the rebel leader cannot be verified, and there is no room for it to be included in the final communiqué

The arrival of the UAE Minister of State, accompanying the rebel delegation in his plane, was an early warning of the occurrence of undesirable consequences.

The Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement in which it objected to the communiqué issued by the Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD). This is because the communiqué, in a clear violation of what the statute requires of issuing decisions by consensus among members, the Secretariat was quick to issue a final communiqué without including the observations and reservations made by the Sudan delegation, and therefore Sudan does not consider this communiqué to represent what came out of the summit, and that it is not binding until the IGAD presidency and its secretariat correct that.

The observations made by the Sudanese delegation on the draft final communiqué were summarized as follows (deleting the reference to the participation of the Minister of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates in the summit, as that did not happen, deleting the reference to the heads of IGAD holding consultations with the delegation of the disbanded Rapid Support Militia (RSF), and this contradicts the truth, for, the President of the Transitional Sovereign Council, who is one of the heads of IGAD, did not participate or hear about the consultations with the representatives of the rebellion, noting that the rebel delegation arrived on the plane of the Minister of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates. (correcting what was reported regarding the approval of the President of the Transitional Sovereign Council to meet with the leader of the rebellion). H.E President stipulated for holding such a meeting the adoption of a permanent ceasefire, and the departure of the rebel forces from the capital and their assembly in areas outside it. (The paragraph that refers to a phone call between the heads of IGAD and the rebel leader, as this call took place between the Kenyan president and the rebel leader after the end of the summit must be deleted, and therefore it is not considered one of the actions of the summit, to the extent that it is referred to in the final communiqué. (Amending the paragraph condemning foreign interventions so that it shall not include equality between the armed forces and the rebellion). (Including a reference to the Arab Republic of Egypt’s call to the initiative of Sudan’s neighboring countries in the paragraph that talks about initiatives to resolve the crisis in Sudan.) (Stipulating the necessity of consulting with the Government of Sudan and obtaining its approval in any effort to resolve the crisis);

It is clear that the fundamental objections came to facts mentioned in the final communiqué that did not occur, or occurred behind the scenes without the knowledge of the Sudanese delegation and cannot be used as evidence against it. Important paragraphs came in contradiction to the speech of the President of the Sovereign Council before the summit, and other paragraphs whose occurrence cannot be verified, because it did not take place during the summit and was not part of the minutes, the IGAD communiqué is considered a fabrication and forgery that is refuted or proven by the summit recordings, and Sudan has the right to demand that the summit’s deliberations be published and presented to an investigation committee to prove the forgery, particularly since the IGAD secretariat was quick to deposit a copy of the communiqué to the African Union and the Security Council, in an attempt to give this communiqué a lost credibility, and the truth is that it is just a communiqué and not an agreement that was signed, in addition to the clear objection to it, and the American and European presence serves as witness to the forgery. This communiqué is just lies and fabrication. Sudan cannot deal with it. It is a deliberate deception motivated by values. It does not contribute to stopping the war, but rather prolongs the suffering of the Sudanese people as a result of its continuation.

It is difficult to believe that there is a head of state who can be bought with money in order to take a certain position in his country, as well as his participation in a conspiracy that harms another country. It is not easy to verify that heads of some countries receive bribes from other countries, but this is what happened at the emergency IGAD summit in Djibouti, which was held for one day and for one topic, which is the war in Sudan, the summit communiqué came to prove to the Sudanese again and again that external solutions will only be at the expense of the state’s sovereignty and the continuation of the plan to destroy, dismantle, and control the state’s entity.

It is known that the summit was held at the request of Sudan after contacts with the IGAD countries and assuming good preparation for it. There is no doubt that the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs committed a serious mistake by leaving the summit before the final statement communiqué was issued, particularly in light of the previous positions of the presidents of Kenya and Ethiopia, and the absence of President Salva Kiir was an early warning that something suspicious was being hatched behind the scenes. The arrival of the Emirati Minister of State, accompanying the rebel delegation in his plane, was an early warning of the occurrence of undesirable consequences. What happened was a precise and planned ambush. Legitimate questions to the Foreign Ministry: (You were in a hurry to be back, what’re you going to catch up?

December 11, 2023 m

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also
Back to top button