As I see it, Taqddum Dilemma is backwards!!

Adel Al-Baz

1
Now Taqddum is in a dilemma.. and it does not know what to do.. and it is a dilemma of its own making, its positions and its keenness to monopolize the political space, which led it to where it is now?
What is the dilemma and where did it get to?
2
Last week, Ben Chambas, Chairperson of the African Union High-Level Implementation Committee, called for a Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue that excludes no one (focus with me on “excluding no one”) and sent his invitation to many political entities, so he invited 4 people from Taqddum to this dialogue and (4) from the Democratic Bloc, including the armed movements, as he invited others such as Umma Party, wing of Mubarak Al-Fadil, the National Movement/Tijani Al-Sisi and others.
However, Chambas did not stop here, as he invited two members of the National Congress/Islamists, considering that the dialogue is comprehensive.
The truth is that Ben Chambas did not do this alone, as he received support from most international actors, and the anthem of the dialogue that “excludes no one” became on everyone’s tongue except Taqddum and here the first dilemma may arise.
3
As for the second dilemma, it surprised her on the part of the Egyptians, who called during this month for a Sudanese forum that “excludes no one” as well… but Progress, which feared that it would reject the Egyptians’ initiative, tried to trick Egypt… but against whom? Taqddum told the Egyptians that it accepted the invitation, but it would accept participation in the conference if it included only those who signed the framework and the armed movements and nothing else… so the Egyptians laughed at them and told them that if we wanted a new framework, we would have supported the old framework .
4
The dilemma they are in now is that if they accept the invitation of Bin Chambas or the Egyptians, the political arena will have been opened up to the brim and the political process they have been talking about will include many others, and thus Taqddum will become a dwarfed player within a wide spectrum of other players whose agendas diverge from theirs, and here lies the dilemma of Taqddums , as they have entered the space of drowning… drowning the political process that they have always rejected and denied all others their participation in by adopting the stupid argument (drowning).
They are now being drowned from all directions… from the European Union EU , which is currently negotiating with the Islamists and accepting them as a player in the political process, and Bin Chambas’ conference and the Egyptians’ conference, all drowning… where is the escape… no, no, no!!.
3
The worst dilemma is that they woke up from their coma to find the whole world rushing to meet the Islamists and accepting them as a key player in the conferences and negotiations.
After a few days, they will find themselves face to face at the same table with the Islamists in a dialogue that excludes no one? So what are they going to do? They have two options: Either they reject all calls and show their stupidity and insistence that they alone monopolize the political process, considering themselves representatives of all of Sudan and monopolizing the revolution. These are illusions that must have been dispelled by now. The second option is to humble themselves a little and accept others, or what they used to call the remnants, and accept (drowning) and acknowledge that they are part of the political scene so that the illusions of monopolizing power are completely dispelled. (There are voices now calling for the complete exclusion of Taqaddum from the political scene, considering that they are partners in the crimes of their allied militia.)
As a result of the two options, if they refuse to be drowned, they will be drowned, isolated from effective action, and the political process will proceed without them, or it may be disrupted by their allies in some Western circles that invested in them.
In both cases, they will lose and regret the opportunities they have lost. If they had accepted being drowned at the time of the framework, their positions would have been advanced and generous, opening the horizon for all Sudanese and allowing them to participate in building their country, but they turned a deaf ear and covered their clothes, so what they were warning about caught up with them. 4
I asked a friend from (Taqddum ) about their predicament, and he affirmed to me that they are in a predicament and have not agreed on any way out of it yet, and time is running out for them.
In a month, the Bin Chambas conference will be held, as will the Egyptians.
I told him, yes, my friend, this is a predicament, but a big one awaits you. I told him the story of the wolf and the fox. They said that one evening a wolf attacked a livestock pen and ate from it until his belly swelled and he became heavy to walk.
While he was about to leave the pen, heavy rain fell, so his feet sank in the mud and he stopped moving.
At that moment, the fox appeared laughing, so the wolf asked him to help him. He continued laughing, then the wolf repeated his request, saying, “Help me, I am in a predicament.” The fox said to him, “No… no, you are not in a predicament now.
Your predicament will be tomorrow morning when the sun rises and the mud dries and your feet are fixed inside it, and people gather to see you in this state… that is the time for your predicament.” Translation
I told him, my friend, your predicament is not now, but you will realize it when the country stabilizes, the sun shines, the mud of your deeds dries up in your feet, and the people gather for the elections. That day is the day of your greatest predicament… and what a day… a day when faces will turn black and white, and you will see on that day faces exhausted by gloom and others laughing and cheerful. Woe to you from that day!