“Self-determination is the only path for Africa’s Yugoslavia”
[ IT ]
Talha Gibriel (Asharq Al-Awsat) talks to Fatima MahjarTalha Gibriel, editor-in-chief in Washington for the Arab world’s first daily newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat, is one of the Sudanese intellectuals who has been most outspoken about the Darfur crisis. An opponent of the central government, for thirty years he has promoted democracy in his homeland. Born in Northern Sudan to a prominent Arab tribe, Gibriel bravely opposed Arab domination over the African people. Recently Gibriel has published various articles in Sudan about the right to self-determination, not only for the people of Darfur, but also for the African and Christian majority in the South and the East of the country.
Dr. Gibriel, Sudan is a country which has suffered several ethnic crises. Could you please explain the main reasons for these conflicts?
Sudan is the “African Yugoslavia.” In my country there are several ethnic groups, religions, and over 200 dialects. Since our Independence in 1956 from the British Empire, Sudan has failed to build national unity; in fact we are not one nation. We have become one country only because the British Empire decided our borders, but the reality on the ground is another one. The other main problem causing conflicts in the country is the lack of democracy. The government in Khartoum thinks that using power will give stability to the country. However, the regime has never taken into consideration that democracy and the use of dialogue could be the solution to the crisis in the Sudan.
The crisis in Darfur is often at the centre of debates in the West. How do you judge the European and the US media’s position on the subject?
Sincerely, until today, I have never read a professional article on the topic. The Western media seems to have its own agenda, which hasn’t much to do with reality. They want to show the crisis in Darfur as a mere ethnic war, but this is just part of the truth. This is a simplistic way of portraying what is going on. Furthermore, many politicians and journalists, who comment on Darfur, have never been to the region.
What is happening in Darfur?
A massacre is taking place in Darfur, and it is the worst humanitarian crisis of this century. The population – both African and Arab tribes – are the victims of marginalization and violence, sponsored by the central government. The regime has left the region with no health care, no educational system and no economical development. Furthermore, some areas in Darfur have been left with no water. However, the population is also victim of African rebels from Darfur, often more engaged in power struggles rather than fighting for human rights. The United Nations have deployed 26.000 peacekeeping forces to the region, in order to protect civilians and refugees, but it is clear that it is not enough. The West, actually, has to start understanding that the problem is not in Darfur, but in Khartoum. Hence, in order to solve the crisis in Darfur, it is necessary for the international community to start supporting the Sudanese people’s battle for democracy and self-determination.
Do you believe that the crisis in Darfur could be solved if Darfur was an independent region?
Absolutely. This is what the population in Darfur wants and this is the only way for Darfur to free itself from Khartoum’s dictatorship. Should Darfur be declared independent, the region would be left to the African tribes, whereas the Arab tribes would move to the nearby region of Kordofan, with an Arab majority, or they could decide to live in Darfur as a minority. However, self-determination is not a solution just for Darfur. As I said before, Sudan is the “African Yugoslavia” and we should follow the example of former Yugoslavia, declaring the independence of the regions in our country where different ethnicities live. This is the only way to prevent future conflicts. I wrote several articles in my country on this subject, in which I suggested that the Sudan should be divided into four States: The North of Sudan, with an Arab majority, Southern Sudan, with an African majority, Darfur, and the East of Sudan, where several conflicts have taken place and where the indigenous Bija tribe lives.
This seems to be a very brave stance. What were the reactions to this proposal in the Sudan?
When I spoke to the leaders of the different factions in Southern Sudan and to prominent figures in Darfur and in the Eastern part of the country, they told me they agreed with me. Self-determination is the only solution. However, these leaders do not dare say this publicly, as they fear reprisals from the central government. Actually, North Sudan wants to keep ruling the country. However, a referendum for self-determination is scheduled in Southern Sudan for 2011. This referendum is part of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), backed by the international community and subscribed to by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) – a movement that represents Southern Sudan – and the Government of Sudan. The CPA has put an end to the more than twenty years of civil war in the southern part of the country, which has an African majority of Christian and Pagan faith, and declared the South of Sudan an autonomous region. Hence, unless something unpredictable happens, in 2011 Southern Sudan is set to declare its independence and pave the way for self-determination in Darfur and Eastern Sudan.
In 2009 general elections are scheduled in Sudan. Do you believe they will actually take place?
I believe the regime will find a way to postpone them. These elections should decide the presidency and elect the parliament of the country. But president Omar Al-Bashir doesn’t seem to be willing to leave office. The National Assembly, actually, should have approved a new electoral law early in December 2007, but this has not taken place. The government eventually justified this by saying it was too busy resolving the crisis in Darfur.
Last July, the Attorney General of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Luis Moreno Ocampo, asked for an arrest warrant against president Al-Bashir for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. What will be the consequences of this initiative on the next elections?
It will only delay the democratic process. Al-Bashir is looking for an excuse for not holding elections in 2009, which constitute an integral part of the implementation of the CPA signed in 2005. Hence, Al-Bashir might take the opportunity to declare a state of emergency and postpone the elections.
15 Dec 2008
Send us your opinion. Write to us at doc@resetdoc.org