|
|
 USAP PRESS STATEMENT
|
FYI from a Sudanese e-mail list
USAP PRESS STATEMENT
7th May 2003
The recent press statements made by the Egyptian President, Mohammed Husni Mubarak during his four hours visit to Khartoum on 30.4.2003 in connection with the unity of Sudan and the revival of the political integration between Egypt and Sudan have caused great concern and anxiety within the ranks and file of South Sudanese in particular and people from the marginalized areas in general. This diplomatic event was immediately followed by another thunder-bolt pronouncement by President Gadhafi of
Libya on 3.5.2003 during the visit of President Omer El Bashir to that country proposing the need for a tripartite unitary constitutional framework.
We believe strongly that the two events did not occur by accident, but rather designed because this was the time when IGAD Peace Talks were about to reconvene in Nairobi amidst the speculation that this was going to be the last session as peace agreement is to be signed by the end of June, 2003. Talking about political integration between Egypt and Sudan, and establishment of a constitutional unity for Egypt, Libya and Sudan at this point in time, when the peace process being brokered by IGAD is about to reach the end of the tunnel is a clear intention of taking us back to
square one.
Such remarks prescribing the importance of unity of Sudan and the warnings about the dangers that will ensue should the South separate are out of place at the moment. This is because the Machakos Protocol had resolved these two items when it defined that the right of self-determination will be exercised under an internationally monitored referendum based on two distinct options namely (i) confirming the unity of the Sudan on new basis or (ii) voting for secession that will result in the creation of a separate
state for the South. The final verdict will come about as a result of
collective democratic decision to be made by Southern Sudanese and NOT by individual Southerners who have assured the Egyptian President that they are for one united Sudan, simply because “separation poses a great danger to Egypt, Sudan and the United States.”
The paradox in this scenario is that it is the oppressed Southern Sudanese who have been struggling for the last 47 years and lost over two million people, five million displaced, several underwent enslavement, others converted to Islam or racially abused and deprived of equitable share of power and national resources; it is these people who, in spite of the institutionalized hegemony should ironically fight to protect unity. The oppressor is instead being encouraged to maintain the status quo. We were expecting to hear from the Egyptian President how far the Northerners were
going to compromise in the next round of talks on the contentious issues now causing stalemate in order to make unity attractive, and not the other way round. Egypt and Libya are expected to be reinforcing the on-going IGAD peace process through the international leverage being exerted on the parties involved in the negotiations since Ms. Nadia Makaram is already representing the Arab League.
The present tripartite shuttling should not be aimed at reviving the
defunct Joint Egyptian-Libyan Initiative, which had ignored the root causes of the Sudan’s problem; the separation of Islam from politics and the right of self-determination for the South. The other unfolding threat to the peace process is the decision made by Egypt to revive the political integration between Egypt, Libya and Sudan, which was cancelled in 1989. If this succeeds, then we shall find ourselves in an endless vicious circle, confirming the usual practice of breaking of agreements.
Southerners need no reminding about the historical role Egypt has been playing in the politics of the Sudan. Egypt was a party to the Ottoman Empire that had ventured to claim land as far South as Lakes Ismail (now Lake Kioga) in Uganda to guarantee its control over the Nile valley. Towards the end the Condominium administration, Egypt-hosted the 1953 conference in Cairo in which the decision to keep Sudan as one country was taken in the absence of Southern Sudanese representatives Southern Sudan
has never witness peace and stability as a result of this decision. We must therefore stand steadfastly against any designs intended at promoting the recurrence of similar events once again.
Finally, the Union of Sudan African Parties, USAP chose to react through this document to put across their views on the current political development involving Egypt, Libya and Sudan. The course of peace is already set and we think that this is not the time for making other proposals.
The views expressed above should not therefore be construed to mean disregard to the aspiration of the Arabs. What we are saying is that while we must respect the aspirations of the Arabs, they by the same token should respect the aspirations of the people of African origin in the Sudan. In other words, Sudanese must be allowed first to put their own house in order through the exercise of self-determination already agreed upon, so that unity with any country after that will be a unity of equals.
====
Sudan for all the Sudanese ..السودان لكل السودانيين
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
sultan
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست