From Confusion and Clamor to Political Triumph

As I See

Adel Al-Baz

1
I viewed President Al-Burhan’s trip to Zurich from three angles: confusion, clamor, and triumph.
The confusion came from the uncertainty and turmoil surrounding the matter.
Ever since journalist Mohamed Othman Ibrahim reported that President Al-Burhan had departed for Geneva, social media erupted, as usual, with journalists and activists racing to confirm or deny the news. People were left guessing about the nature of this trip and the meeting to be held there—its participants, its agenda. Was it a meeting with Trump’s adviser, Paul, to clarify positions? Or with other figures yet to emerge on the scene? Or perhaps negotiations with the sponsor of the Janjaweed? Then, a Qatari aircraft appeared on the radar! What role, then, was Qatar playing? Was it coordinating the trip, mediating, merely facilitating the logistics, or had Doha engineered the meeting from A to Z?

2
The clamor arose because the state refused to honor the people with a few lines stating, for example:
“At the request of the U.S. president, President Al-Burhan will travel to Zurich to meet with U.S. presidential adviser Paul to present the state’s view on the war waged by the rebel militias and the means to end it.”
The public would have simply said, “Go with God’s blessing,” and the president could have departed in broad daylight and returned the same way. Upon his return, the Sovereignty Council could have issued a statement:
“The president has returned safely after a brief visit during which he met with the U.S. envoy and reaffirmed Sudan’s unwavering position in seeking peace that preserves the country’s unity.”
Had that been done, the people would have said: “Thank you, Mr. President. You have expressed our stance exactly. We stand behind you… towards victory and a near breakthrough.”

3
The triumph brought about by the visit is worth noting: the timing of the political earthquake is no longer in others’ hands, but in ours. The dominant question across the media was: “What is Al-Burhan’s position? What did he say?”
In the past, the question was reversed: “What did the Americans say to Al-Burhan? And what will Al-Burhan do?”
They now know the president’s positions from his speeches, such as last week’s declaration: “We will fight until we defeat the militia.” They saw his stance when he sent the Abu Nemo delegation to Jeddah, rejected the Americans’ proposal, and dismissed their ambitions. They waited for him in Geneva, expecting him to rush over—he did not. They waited ten days in vain. Again, in London, he ignored their threats, which dissolved into nothing.

4
What is also gratifying is that Sudan’s steadfast stance has shaken and weakened the so-called Quad alliance, prompting it to seek the involvement of Egypt and Qatar. It has simultaneously strengthened the African Union’s position, which recently declared its rejection of any parallel government, recognizing only one legitimate government headed by Kamal Idris—something it reaffirmed in its latest statement.
Yesterday, the UN Security Council issued a similar stance, rejecting any parallel authority and calling for the lifting of the siege on cities, foremost among them El-Fasher. Meanwhile, international condemnations of militia crimes in the Zamzam and Abu Shouk camps have multiplied, the latest coming from U.S. presidential adviser Paul yesterday.
All of this was achieved through the resilience and sacrifices of the Sudanese people—not as a favor or gift from the international community.

5
But the greatest triumph came when all accounts agreed on one statement President Al-Burhan made to the U.S. adviser: “There is no future for the Janjaweed in Sudan.” This is the people’s core demand—nothing more, nothing less.
A president attuned to his people’s pulse expressed the will of an entire nation in decisive words and firm positions from which he cannot deviate. Those deluding themselves into thinking he will one day succumb to U.S. pressure and reintegrate the Janjaweed and their allies into the political scene are mistaken.
Hulagu… the times have changed. In the heart of hunger and death, the women of El-Fasher carried Kalashnikovs; Hanadi fought with a knife until her last breath. The women of El-Fasher, confronting starvation and death with blades, proved stronger than armies of paid mercenaries. How, then, could Al-Burhan and the army—backed by the people and supported by joint forces—yield to the blackmail of any foreign power? Never.

6
Today, as Sudan celebrates the centennial of its army, the pledge to continue defending the homeland and preserving its sovereignty is renewed. It is now clear that the decision to reject the militia’s return is a strategic, immutable position rooted in the will of a people who have made great sacrifices and refused to see their state hijacked.
With growing regional and international support for Sudan’s stance and the collapse of its opponents’ wagers, the battle for dignity advances confidently toward its conclusion.
The army, forged by the blood of the forefathers, and the people who rally around it today will not permit a reversal that brings killers back into the body of power. The message President Al-Burhan sent from the heart of the army’s celebration was unequivocal: We will not betray the blood of the martyrs. We will not compromise Sudan’s unity. We will not bargain over its dignity.