After a number of postponements it now seems almost certain that presidential and parliamentary elections will be held in April, although clashes between government troops and rebels have resumed. In what kind of atmosphere will the Sudanese go to the polls?

In spite of many people requesting that these elections be postponed once again due to the situation in the country, the elections probably will be held from April 11th to the 13th. I do not believe they will be postponed. It would not be in the interests of any of the players. A group of observers from the European Union have been in the Sudan since the end of February to ensure the various stages of the electoral process are correctly implemented. This is the largest mission of its kind (130 observers, editor’s note), and yet, in a country as vast as Sudan, it will be extremely difficult. For the thousands of refugees, victims of the previous conflict, registering and getting to polling stations will be complicated. There are also large areas of the country that are not stable, such as Darfur, where the “hybrid” mission (United Nations and African Union, put in place in the summer of 2007) has come under attack. In the east too, the situation remains uncertain.

In such a precarious scenario what could the result of these elections be?

If people are unable to vote and President Omar Hassan Al Bashir is re-elected, I believe there will be even greater instability, above all because, to a great extent, the peace agreement (2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement) has not yet been implemented. There are too many unresolved issues, such as, for example, that of the border area between the north and the south of the country, which is rich in oil. So, I do not think it will be possible for the results of these elections to be analysed separately from those of the January 2011 referendum on the independence of Southern Sudan. The next electoral appointments are part of the peace process, begun in 2005, part of a transition to full stability that is still far from being achieved.

Which international intermediaries are considered authoritative by the government in Khartoum in negotiations with the various rebel groups and in bringing peace with Chad?

After charges were brought against President Al Bashir by the International Penal Court (CPI) with accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity for the atrocities committed in Darfur, relations with the international community have been cold. The United States and the European Union can still play an important mediating role. I also believe that over the medium and long-term, the role played by African facilitators led by Thabo Mbeki (president of South Africa from 1999 to 2008) will increase, and, with some exceptions, I generally consider the work of the African Union and the Arab League as positive. China has important economic and commercial interests but does not seem interested in playing a mediating role. International condemnation of Al Bashir has certainly prejudiced some negotiations, but that was inevitable, especially for those who consider the respect of human rights a pillar of their policies, such as the United Nations and the European Union. It was necessary to show support for the people of Sudan and those in bordering countries.

Translated by Francesca Simmons