Making sense of the alleged Sudan-Israel talks - backgrounder
Any treaty Israel would make now, would be a treaty with a transition government that might not be worth the paper it would be written on.
By A.Y. KATSOFA Sudanese protester carries their national flag as they march in a demonstration to mark the anniversary of a transitional power-sharing deal with demands for quicker political reforms in Khartoum, Sudan August 17, 2020(photo credit: REUTERS/MOHAMED NURELDIN ABDALLAH)
Earlier this week, it seemed that the Sudanese might be interested in following in the footsteps of the United Arab Emirates in normalizing ties with Israel. But just as soon as the announcement was made, the country’s Foreign Ministry rescinded its message in support of peace and reconciliation with Israel.What happened? A little background can help clarify:Omar al-Bashir was Sudan’s president for 30 years, from 1989 to 2019. He was finally overthrown, after months of protests, by his military (April 2019) and a mixed “military-civilian” transition-government took charge.The goal is not for the military to stay in power, but only to facilitate a smooth three-year transition government until democratic elections can take place, which are supposed to happen in 2022. May analysts question whether the military will actually let those elections happen.But this where it matters to Israel:The transition government is composed of two wings that don’t necessarily know about the actions of each other. The civilian wing is led by Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok. The military wing is led by Lt. Gen. Abdel al-Burhan.Chairman of the Sovereignty Council of Sudan, al-Burhan is considered “cleaner” than the other generals. It is likely him that sees the opportunity with Israel. He made a blitz when he met Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Uganda this past February, without informing his counterpart, Hamdok.He is also doing what the people likely want. Although there are some groups that oppose Sudanese-Israel relations in the country, the “street” seems to like the idea. After al-Burhan met with Netanyahu, there were no protests or marches against his actions. In fact, Sudanese social media was flooded with support for the meeting.Is it smart for Israel to speak only through the gate of the military channel of the government when the civilian channel would be happy to meet as well?The political leaders in Sudan do not think this is OK and that is where some of the pushback came from this week, when first it looked like the country was interested in peace and then it didn’t.
Either way, any treaty Israel would make now, would be a treaty with a transition government that might not be worth the paper it would be written on.Moreover, Sudan is under tremendous internal turmoil now, with some form of genocide being carried out by the Sudanese Janjaweed (literally Devil on Camel) against the Furs in west Sudan. There are regular stories of murder, rape and village fires.Perhaps if Israel is considering moving forward, stopping the genocide should be a condition of any Israel-Sudanese treaty?
