Rethinking U.S. Strategy: A Pragmatic Approach for Sudan’s Peaceful Future

Rethinking U.S. Strategy: A Pragmatic Approach for Sudan’s Peaceful Future

Shift Focus from Pressure on Burhan to Dialogue—Encouraging Sudan’s Islamists Toward Democratic Transformation

By Mekki ELMOGRABI

U.S. Special Envoy’s Misjudgment in Sudan

Unfortunately, U.S. Special Envoy Tom Perriello has been influenced by internal Sudanese deception, particularly from the Forces of Freedom and Change (FFC), currently, the political cover of the genocidal Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia, also known as the Janjaweed. This faction made him believe that Sudan’s President of Sovereignty Council and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) Commander, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, is weak and can be easily intimidated by accusing him of being controlled by Islamists, saying to him “to prove otherwise, obey our commands blindly”. Such an approach has proven over and over ineffective with Burhan.

Instead of relying on these misleading tactics, it would be wiser to engage directly and openly with Burhan and even the Islamists themselves and tell them what the real concerns in the eyes of the U.S. are. The current strategy not only misleads American public opinion but also jeopardizes U.S. interests and relations with Sudan and Africa.

Ignoring the Islamists in Sudan and relying on Janjaweed and their political cover only increases the Islamists’ popularity and fuels anti-American and anti-Western sentiment. Therefore, pressure must be put on the U.S. administration to reveal the truth about the FFC’s connection to the Janjaweed, stop supporting them, and engage in meaningful dialogue with the Islamists.

Perriello, good start, then changed, why?!

It was widely expected that Envoy Perriello would maintain the professional level he displayed in his interview with ‘Saad Al-Kabli’, a Sudanese American who runs TV program in the USA. However, Perriello’s recent actions have aligned him with Envoys Volker and Godfrey, both of whom caused significant setbacks for the UN and the U.S. in the Sudan file before leaving their positions.

Perriello claimed that Burhan wanted to go to Geneva for the negotiations but the invisible power of the Islamists stopped him. In response, Burhan came out in a press conference saying “No, dear Perriello, It’s me who decided”!

Burhan, in his capacity as a leader of Sudan’s historical military institution, has taken a decisive and bold position, as evident in his recent press conference. He described the negotiations in Geneva (August 2024) as a farce aimed at glorifying the RSF militia – the Janjaweed, which continues to commit genocide. Even the lie of the aid that so-called international friends of Sudan claim will reach those in need has been refuted by Burhan, who exposed the truth better than any politician or activist. He highlighted that the RSF militia forced most of Geneina’s residents from Masalit African tribe in Darfur to flee, replaced them with criminals and invaders from Arab nomads invited by RSF, and now the U.S. and others seeks to deliver aid to these invaders while ignoring the displaced Masalit victims in Chad.

Rethinking U.S. Strategy: Dialogue with all, no exclusion

Let’s address the issue head-on: If the majority in any Muslim country chooses to uphold Islamic laws, should the U.S. cut ties, impose sanctions, or instead respect that country’s decision and seek to protect American interests within the existing framework? The U.S. must recognize that it isn’t the sole global power dictating terms to other nations. Other players are ready to exploit any rift between the U.S. and countries in Africa and the developing world. The reality is clear: America cannot reshape the world to its will. Instead, it should lead by example and prioritize safeguarding its interests.

The questions facing America are: Is it still the best example of freedom, human rights, and social justice? Can it serve as the model for Muslim or non-Muslim countries to follow, or does America first need to reform itself? Should the responsibility of the American administration be focused on building good relations with other nations, rather than imposing its will upon them?

Instead of pressuring President Burhan and SAF to act against Islamists, the U.S. administration should encourage Burhan to engage in dialogue with all political forces, including the Islamists, for the sake of peace and democratic transformation in Sudan. It would be preferable for the U.S. administration to ask Burhan to facilitate a dialogue between the U.S. and the Islamists as soon as possible.

If this does not happen, civil society organizations and think tanks in the U.S. should take the initiative and bypass the administration, which may be following the agendas of other countries rather than prioritizing American interests. Taking this initiative is crucial to preventing further harm to U.S. interests and stopping the continued expansion of its opponents and competitors in Africa, such as Russia, China, and potentially Iran.

Why have all Western-backed attempts to abolish Islamic law failed?!

A recent widely circulated video highlights this issue: a Sudanese politician, Nasr al-Din (FFC government 2019), was seen fleeing from Sudanese citizens in London who were questioning him about FFC relationship with the terrorist genocidal Janjaweed, the RSF militia. In the eyes of Sudanese, the FFC, deceived the Sudanese people by claiming to be revolutionaries against Al-Bashir. However, the Sudanese people now despise them because they support the Janjaweed.

This situation underscores a crucial fact that American elites must understand to make informed decisions about Sudan. Despite their revolutionary mandate and support from the Western countries, figures like Nasr al-Din and former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok failed to abolish Islamic Sharia laws in Sudan. They practically preserved these laws and then left, despite holding American and Canadian nationalities and receiving support from organizations in EU and U.S.!

Those leaders misled defenders of liberalism and human rights in America and Western countries, falsely claiming that they could bring about change because Islamists are allegedly hated. However, these so-called reforms were superficial, and the basic Islamic laws remained in place due to popular conviction.

The amendments they claimed to have adopted in 2020 were actually ‘homework’ left behind by the previous regime, resulting from internal evaluations and a successful dialogue between the U.S. and Sudan 2015-2018, that had begun over two years before they took power. It is unfortunate that what was achieved peacefully and through dialogue with the U.S. has now been turned into pressures and punishments. The Writer of this article was a member of the Sudan embassy in Washington D.C., and U.S.-Sudan file during the negotiations time, I confirm that it was a prepared ‘homework’!

In Sudan, attempts to abolish Islamic law have been made and have failed. It’s essential to recognize that the political system in Sudan, established in the sixteenth century, is rooted in Islamic principles, which will not be easily changed by external influences combined with internal deception, which is the worst recipe for US to take. This approach has had the opposite effect, making it necessary to engage in dialogue with the Islamists.

The Way Out:

• Engage in Direct Dialogue: The U.S. should initiate direct and open communication with Sudan’s President Burhan and all political factions, including the Islamists, to foster peace and democratic transformation.
• Reassess Support Strategies: The U.S. administration should critically reassess its support for factions like the FFC or the Janjaweed’s political cover, which may be counterproductive to U.S. interests in Sudan.
• Civil Society Involvement: Encourage U.S. civil society organizations, think tanks and media to independently engage with Sudanese political forces, bypassing potentially misguided governmental policies.
• Transparency and Accountability: Push for transparency in U.S. foreign policy concerning Sudan, ensuring that decisions are made in the best interests of U.S. national security and international relations, not influenced by external agendas.

Mekki ELMOGRABI, Sudanese Consultant, press writer, international relations analyst, former diplomat in Washington D.C., and Chairman of MCAA. Reach him via email elmograbi@gmail.com