The African Union (AU)returns to its mysterious agenda

Zain Al-Abidin Saleh Abdel Rahman

On Friday 21\6\2024, the African Union AU issued a statement confirming its previous position on the ongoing war in Sudan and calling on the warring parties, the armed forces and the Rapid Support RSF Militia, to stop fighting immediately and give priority to the interests of Sudan and its people. The statement confirms that there is no sustainable military solution to the conflict and that only a truly comprehensive dialogue can lead to a sustainable solution to the current situation.
It then returns to the roadmap that the African Union AU had presented to resolve the conflict in Sudan and which was adopted by the “Peace and Security Council” of the Union on May 27, 2023. It is noteworthy that the African Union AU has become accustomed to waking up from its slumber through the guidance provided to it by some countries influential in international relations, particularly the “United States US and the fingers of the Emirates have also begun to appear through its movement of the leaders of some countries affiliated with the “IGAD” organization that sided with the militia, and work to serve it, and try to save it so that it can be returned again to the military and political arenas, and the war is postponed for another period in which the militia More powerful than it was on April 15, 2023..
Note on the role of the United States US : Through its representatives in Sudan, it is also trying to return the wheel of the political situation in Sudan to the idea of ​​​​the “framework agreement” and that its envoy is the one who gave the signal to the African Union AU to move on the Sudanese issue now, as the American envoy had stated last Tuesday, June 18, 2024, and quoted from news agencies, Tom Perriello said in his statement (We have other alternative options if the warring parties in Sudan do not show enough seriousness to reach a negotiated peaceful solution) and added, saying (The world needs to think of an alternative plan, possibly peacekeeping forces in some form, within the framework of the African Union AU or the United Nations UN and it is known that the American envoy had attended the “African Union AU meetings in Addis Ababa to pass the agenda he wants to pass, as he wants to repeat the same plan that IGAD had presented at the meeting of the so-called Quartet Committee held in Addis Ababa in July 2023, in which he had threatened both Abi Ahmed, the Prime Minister Ethiopia and William Ruto, the Kenyan president, in the presence of the political group representing the political wing of the militia, where they threatened to send forces from East Africa to Sudan, provided that Khartoum becomes free of weapons within a radius of fifty kilometers.
What is noticeable is the same plan that the African Union AU statement now refers to, and the strange thing about the matter is; The African Union AU statement did not refer at all to the countries supporting the militia and the countries neighboring Sudan through which weapons and fighters pass to enter Sudan, which confirms the size of the conspiracy against Sudan by several countries and the use of Sudanese leaders in them…
If we move to another circle that has an active participation in the war, we find that the sharp debate that took place between Sudan’s permanent representative to the United Nations UN and the representative of the Emirates UAE which supports the militia with weapons, maiming, and mobilizing mercenary fighters from Chad, Niger, Mali, the Central African Republic ( CAR) South Sudan, and Ethiopia, this debate made the UAE fear the consequences of this accusation, and it appeared in the response of its representative who was unable to refute Sudan’s accusations against his country, and went in his speech in another direction in which he affirmed that his country does not recognize that the Sudanese representative represents the state of Sudan but rather represents the SAF and the UAE also feared after the Security Council approved the documents submitted by Sudan condemning the Emirates.
Therefore, it was necessary for all the leaders of the countries that employ it to support the militia and those who stand With her..
Although some are trying to deny their pro-militia position, their statements expose them, particularly Osama Saeed, a leader in “Taqddum “, who spoke to “Al Jazeera Live” channel and repeated the talk of the UAE delegate that the Sudanese delegate does not represent Sudan but rather represents the SAF and he lacks legitimacy, and he said that Abdullah Hamdok represents legitimacy, although Hamdok himself denied this through the agreement he had signed with the Sudan Liberation Movement ( SLM) led by Abdel Wahid Mohamed Nour, where he signed in the name of the former Prime Minister of Sudan, confirming his resignation.
The strange thing is that some leaders do not look at the charters of international organizations and what they stipulate. Does the United Nations UN accept organizations or delegates of institutions? The United Nations UN accepts delegates from countries, and does not even accept memoranda and statements from organizations..
Osama Saeed went with the statement that had been issued by “Taqddum ” in which it says that the Sudanese delegate represents one of the parties to the conflict..
The war in Sudan is not the battlefields currently taking place in Sudan, but rather a multi-party war with countries seeking to seize the country’s wealth, and working to divide the country, and Sudanese leaders are working with it without caring about the consequences… We ask Allah for good insight..