Applying the New Sudan Vision to Resolve Sudan’s Conflict

By Mayiik Ayii Deng*

I write this piece following the victory of the Republican party candidate, Donald J. Trump, the President-elect of the United States of America. The conflict in Sudan between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemeti) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by General Abdel Fatah el Burhan is more profound than many believe. Many in the West think this is a fight between the two generals, but it’s much deeper.

As a former member of the Republic of South Sudan cabinet and current Member of Parliament, the contributions of two South Sudanese leaders–Dr. John Garang de Mabior and Dr. Francis Mading Deng–have shaped my understanding of the struggle for a new Sudan. In this piece, I will discuss how their ideas can help us understand the rise of General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemeti) and his stand-off with General Abdel Fatah el Burhan in the context of Sudan's long and painful march toward a new Sudan.

Sudan's current events result from state and nation-building processes that have reached a critical fork in the road. Upon concluding the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, Garang said, "Sudan will never be the same again." To understand this statement, we must examine the vision of a new Sudan as part of a historical process. Deng and Garang laid out this vision for us in a complementary manner. I’ll summarize their perspectives as briefly as possible, knowing each man’s ideas have been articulated in books and speeches.

Deng depicted the New Sudan as the culmination of a tumultuous journey to nationhood, marked by a conflict of identities. In his seminal work, War of Visions, he characterized Sudan as grappling with an identity crisis. The nation found itself at a crossroads, where its governance, power distribution, and resource allocation were based on notions of Arabism and Islamism. While Deng acknowledged the enriching influence of Arab culture on Sudan, he remained steadfast in his belief that Sudan's roots were deeply African—geographically and ethnically. This belief extended even to Sudanese Arabs who he argued were in a dangerous state of self-denial. In another of his notable works, "Dynamics of Identification," he advocated for national integration rooted in this African foundation, which provides for inclusion rather than the exclusive identity politics of the “Old Sudan.” He championed a vision where every ethnic group, irrespective of its background, was accorded not only respect but equal access to resources and power. Reflecting the ethos of Haile Selassie's speech to the League of Nations, famously echoed in Bob Marley's song "War," Deng believed that lasting peace would remain elusive as long as racial superiority persisted in Sudan.

Conversely, Garang framed the Sudanese dilemma through the disparities between urban centers and marginalized rural areas. He identified the heart of Sudan's issue as being political and economic at its core. Political disparities originating from power dynamics in Khartoum manifested in the uneven distribution of resources and development, creating an entrenched problem of marginalization. This inequality was accentuated by industries profiting from extraction and an economic system designed to perpetuate a divide between the affluent core and the impoverished periphery. Garang's solution was twofold: ensure equitable power distribution and eliminate discrimination in Khartoum. Concurrently, he envisioned an economic strategy centered on agriculture, aiming to utilize government-derived revenues, like oil royalties, to bolster rural development. He aimed to bring urban amenities to the countryside, reducing the rural populace's need to migrate to cities, risk unemployment, and live in undignified slums. As a cross-cutting theme, Garang argued that by reuniting with our shared history in ancient Kush, Sudanese of all ethnic groups could find common ground.

Together, the visions of Deng and Garang present a holistic blueprint for Sudan. They integrate the socio-cultural dynamics, as emphasized by Deng, with the politico-economic structures, as highlighted by Garang, crafting a comprehensive approach to nation-building and statecraft.

I remember many nights in Deng's home in Washington, DC, where I would visit his son, Daniel Jok, and we would eat dinner. Daniel’s mother is an American but would serve Sudanese food. I remember watching their youngest son, Dennis Biong, and their pet dog, a Japanese Akita named Bane, in attendance as if both were listening.

Deng spent hours educating us about the New Sudan vision. His cultural and legal anthropology background allowed him to see Sudan's diversity as a strength. He advocated for a "One Sudan, Many Systems" approach, recognizing the unique needs and perspectives of different regions and ethnic groups. Throughout, he maintained a core focus on the dignity of all groups, African and Afro-Arab.

On the other hand, I had a chance to learn about Garang’s vision of the New Sudan when I moved to the United States on an educational scholarship in 1990 and started intensively studying his videos and audio. I had already started following the radio SPLA in Sudan as a teenager. I had long been a card-carrying member of the SPLM since 1990 when the late Paul Anadi opened an SPLM Office in the Silver Spring suburb of Washington DC with the help of Manute Bol and others. So, I was familiar with the philosophy of the New Sudan since that time.

Deng and Garang provided a comprehensive framework for building a new Sudan that embraced diversity and addressed marginalized communities' needs. The CPA was to be the instrument for achieving this vision. However, the stark reality of the situation differed from this ideal. The Islamist National Congress Party (NCP), which at that time ruled Sudan, did not make unity attractive during the interim period, hence the ultimate decision of the South to secede in 2011 when it established the world’s youngest sovereign state.

Then came President Salva Kiir, the torchbearer of the New Sudan vision after Garang. As a founding member of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM/A), he, too, was the architect of that vision. However, Kiir understood that South Sudan had to assert its independence first. As the twice-serving Minister in the Office of the President in post-independence South Sudan, I learned about President Kiir and his thinking well. He steered the referendum for self-determination of South Sudan in 2011 but did not stop at independence.

During his Independence Day speech, Kiir assured the marginalized people of Sudan, many of whom had joined the SPLM’s struggle, that South Sudan would never abandon them or their cause. Kiir opened a new era of constructive engagement and cooperation with Khartoum, including playing a critical role in facilitating the Juba Peace Agreement (JPA) among the political parties.

This agreement, which was concluded after the fall of Sudan’s President Omer el Beshir, brought the war in Darfur to a complete end and promised to fulfill the aspirations of the Sudanese people that led to the December Revolution–freedom, peace, and justice. The agreement almost held, but not quite. Sudan descended into full-scale war on April 15, 2023. In my then capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs I had a direct line of sight into the dynamics of this collapse, including personal interaction with all the principals involved, including Generals Hemedit and Burhan.

These three statesmen–Salva Kiir, John Garang, and Francis Deng–each uniquely contributed to the New Sudan journey. For example, Deng influenced the US policy on South Sudan through his co-chairmanship of the US Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS), which suggested the One Sudan, Two Systems formula, aligning US foreign policy with the SPLM vision. The policy included making unity conditional on a self-determination vote after a period designed to make unity attractive. Without that US policy, there would not be an independent South Sudan today.

As we now stand at a critical juncture in Sudan's history, the journey toward a New Sudan is far from over. The current leaders, Generals Hemeti and Burhan, can learn from the works of these great men. They can chart a course toward a New Sudan, even if it means departing from the entrenched Arab Islamic political agenda they once espoused. This agenda, after all, is antithetical to the principles of pluralism and federation that a New Sudan represents. Their challenge is to champion the change that will inevitably come. The real question is which, if any, of the two shall bear the mantle of the new Sudan vision.

For now, South Sudan and Sudan face profound challenges. If they address the common political and economic problems that plague them, they can establish viable independent states bound by practical and powerful forms of bilateral cooperation.

Drawing on the inherited wisdom of these leaders, I want to suggest that to achieve the "One Sudan, Multiple Systems" goal, a framework that addresses ethno-regional conflicts and fosters unity and equitable resource distribution across Sudan might include the following critical elements:

-Federal structure: Implement a federal system of governance with autonomous ethno-regional entities (Darfur, Kordofan, Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, Beja, Nubia, and others) within a unified Sudan.
-Legal framework: Establish a constitutionally enshrined legal framework that protects group rights, including minority, and cultural diversity and recognizes each region's heritage.
=Equitable resource distribution: Design a system for fair allocation of resources, including natural resource revenue, to all regions, promoting economic development and reducing conflict potential.
-Inclusive political representation: Implement electoral reforms ensuring fair representation of all regions and ethnic groups in the national government and establish regional governments with locally elected officials.
-Security arrangements: Create a unified, professional national army composed of forces from all regions operating under civilian control to address security concerns and ensure federal system stability.
-Conflict resolution mechanisms: Develop a system for peacefully resolving disputes between regions, the central government, and regional authorities, including an independent judiciary and a national reconciliation commission that works closely with traditional leaders.
-Cultural preservation and promotion: Encourage the preservation and celebration of each region's diverse cultural heritage through regional cultural institutions, festivals, and education programs.
-International support: Garner international backing for the framework by engaging with regional organizations (e.g., the African Union, IGAD, and the League of Arab States) and international partners (e.g., the United Nations), ensuring long-term success and technical assistance.

At this critical juncture, Sudan's leaders, including Hemeti and Burhan, must draw upon the foundational thinking of our great intellectuals and statesmen, such as Kiir, Deng, and Garang. They should prioritize forming a civilian-led government, pushing for democratic reforms, and addressing insecurity by reining in and disciplining armed groups and militias, including the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). A professional, unified army operating under civilian control that respects human rights is essential for Sudan's stability. So, too, is a unifying national identity framework.

The international community can contribute to Sudan's efforts to build a more inclusive, diverse, and prosperous nation by providing financial and technical assistance and promoting regional stability. By following the visions of Kiir, Deng, and Garang and embracing the concept of "One Sudan, Many Systems," Sudan can move forward on a path toward lasting peace, unity, and development. This journey requires the collective efforts of Sudan's people, leaders, and the international community. The beauty of this vision (the New Sudan) and the formula is that it can equally apply to many countries facing similar situations in the Horn of Africa and beyond. Conversely, if we fail, Sudan will collapse into mutually competitive ethno-regional enclaves, declaring their status as liberated areas.

In reflecting on Sudan’s unfolding journey, we must recognize the revolutionary seeds planted decades ago in the southern soil of Sudan with the Anyanya Movement of 1955. That initial push for self-determination blossomed into the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) in 1983, seeding the spirit of liberation across the regions of Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, Beja, Nubia, and eventually Darfur. Over the years, these regions transformed from peripheral voices to forces of profound resistance, challenging the centralized power of Khartoum.

With South Sudan’s independence, the revolutionary fervor sown in the north continued unabated, a testament to the vision that Dr. John Garang voiced when he declared, “Sudan will never be the same again.” Now, as the RSF finds itself aligned with the marginalized of Sudan, a new chapter in the New Sudan vision emerges through armed resistance. This convergence brings forth critical questions: Can the RSF articulate a unifying and inclusive political vision capable of resonating with other revolutionary forces, including the civilian leaders who fueled the Khartoum revolution? And can Sudan’s Armed Forces, under General Burhan’s leadership, embrace the inevitability of a New Sudan—a nation rooted in justice, unity, and equity?

*Mayiik Ayii Deng is a former Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation and Minister of Presidential Affairs in the Government of the Republic of South Sudan. He is currently a member of the National Liberation Council of the ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and a Member of the South Sudan Parliament