The Invasion of Fools in Cyberspace: Factories of Myths

As I See

Adel El-Baz

1
Forest fires often erupt without anyone knowing their cause, carried away by the wind to unpredictable destinations and destruction. Sudan’s political cyberspace is no different—fires flare up suddenly, with no clarity on who ignited them or why, only to spread until the country finds itself on edge.

2
This past week witnessed two such blazes. The first erupted after the Geneva meeting, and the second after the Sudanese army’s commander-in-chief, President Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, announced promotions and retirements within the officer corps.

Following the Geneva meeting, rumor mills went into overdrive, feeding on nothing more than the sight of a Qatari royal plane departing Port Sudan for Zurich. Social media commentators immediately spun elaborate narratives: Burhan had struck a secret deal with the Janjaweed, or perhaps with the UAE, or even with the Americans. Each “analysis” was more inventive than the last—deals to normalize relations with Israel in exchange for mineral rights, pushing Russians and Iranians out of Sudan, or dividing power between generals. Others claimed Burhan was selling off land, ports, and even Islamists as a “package deal” to Abu Dhabi.

3
These myths ignite the digital wildfire, creating chaos beyond reason. Such frenzied speculation defies dialogue or debate, for judgments are delivered instantly without waiting for facts. The priority is to catch the trend before sunset—truth be damned. Thus, one hears: “They’ve sold the country to the Americans,” “Burhan wants to bring back the revolutionaries,” or “He’s trading Islamists to the Emiratis.” Such nonsense spreads like lightning, embraced not only by gullible users but also by prominent journalists and academics one once respected. To witness professors sharing these fantasies on WhatsApp groups and Facebook is a sobering embarrassment, leaving one questioning the very worth of their credentials.

4
Why, one must ask, would Burhan normalize ties with Israel now—while Palestinians are being slaughtered in Gaza, and Sudan itself issues daily condemnations of the atrocities? What did he gain from his earlier overture toward Israel under the civilian government, which only led to sanctions and international isolation?

And why would he secretly normalize relations with the Americans for economic benefits? Would such a deal need to be hidden?

Equally absurd are claims that Burhan might reinstate Abdalla Hamdok or other civilian leaders despised by the public. Burhan himself has told more than one envoy: “Our issue is not with Hamdok, but with the people, who refuse him.” To believe he would restore such figures to power is pure fantasy.

5
Another myth: that Burhan is conspiring with the UAE to uproot Islamists. But how could he, while these same Islamists are now fighting shoulder to shoulder with the army and declaring they will only return to power through elections? They have renounced transitional authority since the fall of Bashir. To imagine Burhan igniting another internal conflict while trying to extinguish the current war is sheer madness. Yet, in the digital sphere, the impossible becomes possible—and the absurd becomes trend.

6
The second digital blaze erupted over routine military retirements and promotions—a practice long entrenched in Sudan’s army. Despite the ongoing war, the step reaffirmed institutional continuity and professionalism. But instead of praise, rumors swirled: Burhan was accused of sidelining rivals, targeting Islamists, or fearing the rise of other commanders. Ironically, the officers themselves accepted the decisions calmly, as part of military tradition. The loudest protests came not from the ranks but from civilians, many driven by emotion, bias, or sheer hostility toward any decision Burhan makes.

7
It seems, then, that these digital infernos will not cease. Every action or decision will be met with another wave of rumor, so long as the ultimate prize remains “the trend.” For many, social media is nothing more than a cheap ladder to fame, regardless of the damage inflicted on society or the nation.

As the Italian writer Umberto Eco once remarked:
“Social media gives legions of idiots the same right to speak as Nobel laureates. In the past, they only spoke in bars after a glass of wine, without harming society—and were quickly silenced. Now they have the right to speak everywhere. It is the invasion of fools.”