Separation under local and international auspices
The referendum results were welcomed by Northern separatists with the slaughtering of cattle, and chanting celebrations in the South. The most important characteristic of the separatist rhetoric, in both the North and the South of Sudan, is the cancellation of facts, the falsification of awareness and the neglect of pressing realities escaping into a future of illusions.
Photo by: HannanikThe average citizen in the North remained under the influence of the separatist discourse, which blames the political conflict between the South and North on their different religious perceptions. This rhetoric places the Southerner (Christian) as a burden to be disposed of, and separation as a solution promising a country of affluence and comfort with one religion and one culture (Arab - Muslim).
This discourse deliberately ignored the political and economic risks resulting from the secession of the South. The government media frequently stressed the existence of minerals buried in Northern lands, and denied any drawbacks resulting from losing 75% of the North's oil revenues originating in the South. All this took place in spite of tangible information undermining the validity of these governmental claims.
On the other hand, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) preached the separatist discourse openly. In the midst of chants and beating drums, truths were buried, and the slogans of revolution drowned the Southern scene, even though the revolution had passed, and the focus should have shifted to the challenges facing the new emerging country.
Furthermore, reading between the lines of Sudanese politics, we find that separation was the choice of the two Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) partners, the SPLM and the National Congress Party (NCP), with the consent and support of big players, particularly the United States of America.
"The time is too late to talk about searching for miracles to make unity attractive."
Several months before the referendum, the Sudanese Foreign Minister Ali Karti released a press statement saying: "The time is too late to talk about searching for miracles to make unity attractive." This was the first public expression from a leading figure in the NCP portraying unity as no longer an option. This is without any mention of the practices the ruling party carried out to alienate the Southerners in the North, such as the repeated mention of the application of Islamic laws, and the continuous police raids on the Southern liquor makers.
Pagan Amum - UN Photo / Tim McKulka
The SPLM employed all its capabilities to support the option of secession. The Secretary-General of the SPLM, Pagan Amum, said several months before the beginning of referendum: "There is no possibility or even a slim chance for unity in Sudan, unless the National Congress re-occupies the South and takes control through military force. It will be a bloody step, and we will not unite."
The two parties worked, through different strategies, against the provisions of the CPA, which compels both the North and the South to make unity an attractive option. The United States of America, the primary supporter of the CPA, has as well relentlessly worked towards separation, and utilised for this purpose different approaches and various strategies.
This is how separation became the natural and inevitable result of a peace process based on two completely contradictory projects: the NCP's 'Sudan Islamic Civilisation Project' and the SPLM's 'Secular New Sudan Project'. These two projects reflected the interests of the ruling classes, both in the North and the South, and fell far away from the aspirations of the people in the two areas.
Check the SUDANVOTES interview with Northern separatist Dr. Sati Sorkati from the Just Peace Forum Party
The separatist discourse, backed with power and wealth in the North and the South, was imposed on the Sudanese scene as a whole. This was in turn achieved through diverse policies the two parties opted for, distancing the North from the South, and backing voices of secession against those of unity.
The historical injustices committed against the South cannot be denied. The suffering resulting from this injustice breached the North-South trustful relationship, and has greatly contributed to the separation we live today. It is however equally true that the SPLM and NCP could have tipped the balance towards unity, if they had been committed to a united Sudan. The matter of the fact is though, that Sudan, the largest country in Africa was decapitated under local and international auspices.
