When Silence Becomes Betrayal: A Response to the Statement by the SPLM–Agar Faction Regarding U.S.

07:31 AM June, 01 2025

Sudanese Online
محمد عبدالله ابراهيم-الخرطوم-السودان
My Library
Short URL





Mohammed Abdullah Ibrahim

31 May 2025



I came across a statement issued by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), Malik Agar faction, signed by its official spokesperson and dated May 23, 2025, titled “Denouncing the Unjust U.S. Sanctions Imposed on Sudan.” I read it once, then a second time, and a third .. And with each reading, my sense of astonishment, confusion, and disbelief deepened. I doubted the authenticity of the statement; I thought it might have been fabricated. perhaps concocted by an adversary seeking to drag the movement into ridicule. But I quickly investigated. I reviewed the pages of several comrades in the movement, including the official page of the spokesperson, and found the statement there. It was real, undoubtedly issued by the movement.



Only then did I feel a deep shock and disappointment that transcended any sense of affiliation. I asked myself: Could this entity have sunk into such hypocrisy؟ Were we complicit in this swamp of ugliness and sycophancy without realizing it؟ Or was it simply a mistake. an individual act, a structural flaw, a weakness in experience…؟



I was fully aware that Malik Agar, who has spent half his life in armed struggle and experienced the bitterness of war and exile, is not alone in this legacy. His people and community in Blue Nile paid the price of rebellion. Every home, every neighborhood, every root of the land where the dream of justice was born offered sacrifices. Yet I was perplexed: How could I interpret this position today؟ How could I understand a statement that condemns those who condemned the killers, and justifies-under the guise of nationalism. the very crimes committed on the same geography from which the movement was born؟



I am fully aware that the war that broke out in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) is merely a grim repetition of familiar scenarios. It mirrors the second war that erupted between the SPLM and the Sudanese army before South Sudan’s secession. on June 6, 2011 in the Nuba Mountains, and on September 5, 2011 in Blue Nile. The rhetoric is the same: “agents,” “foreign-backed,” “enemies of Islam and Arabism” .. A broken record used for decades to justify the killing of innocents and the demonization of opponents.



Until recently, I was one of the leaders of this movement. I had profound disagreements with its leader on key issues. matters he acknowledged in private but fled from publicly. He even attempted to align with dangerous positions that undermined the movement’s legacy. So I left in August 2024. Yet I made a personal vow to preserve the ethics of disagreement-to not publicly address the movement or its leaders. I thought silence was a virtue. But there are moments when silence becomes a crime, even a betrayal-especially when words are written like talismans to ward off curses, when blood is wrapped in the national flag, and truth is raped in the name of patriotism. In such moments, responding is no longer a choice-it is a duty. Hence, this article is a response to that statement. Yet, I remain committed to my personal ethical boundaries-except in moments that demand a break from silence.



Yes, for the sake of honesty and history, lying, hypocrisy, flattery, and spite did exist among comrades within the movement. But I never imagined the audacity would reach such an official level-where a formal statement is issued in the name of the movement, condemning sanctions not imposed for economic pressure or political targeting, but in response to the Sudanese army’s use of internationally banned chemical weapons. A stain upon the conscience of history. While I personally believe sanctions should be targeted at the leaders of warring factions-not entire states-I also understand that those imposing these sanctions likely have legitimate reasons for doing so.



The SPLM statement condemning U.S. sanctions did not clarify what kind of sanctions were imposed. It didn’t even hint at the alleged reasons. But it is clear it refers to the sanctions imposed due to the Sudanese army’s use of chemical and internationally banned weapons.



Chemical weapons are not myths, nor are they exaggerated allegations. They are a grim reality etched into the bodies of millions of Sudanese people-ever since the state, and specifically its army, chose to use instruments of extermination against its own citizens instead of protecting them. These weapons were not used in defense of the homeland, but to execute the will of a regime that sees diversity as a threat and difference as enmity.



Since the 1980s, the Sudanese army has not hesitated to use banned bombs and chemical weapons against unarmed civilians in South Sudan, the Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, and Darfur. These were not just military campaigns-they were systematic operations to wipe out entire communities using weapons that leave no visible wounds but silently destroy from within, turning air, water, and soil into toxic time bombs.



The repeated use of these weapons has killed thousands. Their lingering toxins continue to claim lives, deform bodies, and lay waste to vast areas. Thousands suffer from incurable diseases and unexplained disabilities as a result. Yet .. why has no one been held accountable؟ Why have these crimes been forgotten؟



Most Sudanese people didn’t know. because media back then was state-controlled. Truth-tellers were accused, tortured, and killed. There were no satellite channels, no internet, no platforms to show the world or Sudanese citizens the faces of children whose lungs were burned without fire, or women whose wombs died from inhaling lethal gases.



Still, even with limited access to information, these atrocities did not go unrecorded. In 2000, Amnesty International raised reports about chemical weapons used in rebel-held areas in South Sudan, the Nuba Mountains/South Kordofan, and Blue Nile. In 2004, similar reports followed. With the escalation of the Darfur war, Amnesty’s 2016 report “Scorched Earth, Poisoned Air” documented the Sudanese army’s chemical attacks in Jebel Marra. among the most devastating assaults on civilians. The report detailed 32 chemical attacks that killed hundreds of children and women, leaving environmental and health destruction that will persist for generations.



I know for certain that many SPLM and SPLA leaders-chief among them Malik Agar-are fully aware of these facts. They know dozens of their comrades and civilians who were victims of those internationally banned weapons. They remember those who survived with bodies deformed by toxins.



Today, amid a new war since April 2023, chemical weapons have resurfaced-but this time under the scrutiny of advanced technology, cameras, and digital documentation. Even soldiers within the army have documented and shared footage proving the army’s use of such weapons. These crimes are no longer a mystery-they need no interpretation or denial. And the SPLM is neither qualified to confirm nor deny them-it knows nothing about the army’s plans, operations, or weaponry in this war, let alone its chemical arsenal. Its role has been reduced to that of a mobilization tool-sending the sons of marginalized villages to serve as fuel for this senseless, cursed war.



When the U.S. directly accused the Sudanese army of using chemical weapons, the SPLM should have applauded. It should have reclaimed its pain and stood up for itself instead of selling out. It was once a victim of these weapons. Instead, it has become a blind defender of the same hand that once struck it. Washington does not need the SPLM to confirm or deny the army’s actions. Nor does the movement’s approval or rejection of the U.S. decision matter-to Washington, to the international community, or even to the Sudanese people mentioned in the statement.



The real scandal is not the sanctions. but that a movement claiming a revolutionary legacy would rush to defend the very institution that committed the worst crimes against it. That it would justify actions that are and remain crimes. That it would become a mouthpiece for the army that used the same weapons against its people in South Sudan, the Nuba Mountains, and Blue Nile. That it would defend these crimes now under the cover of “sovereignty” and “national security.” If the SPLM’s founding leader, Dr. John Garang, were to rise from his grave and read this statement, he would die again. again and again. and refuse to rise once more.



How can a movement with “liberation” in its name adopt the same discourse as the central authoritarian regime it once resisted؟ How can it morph into a distorted clone of the very power it once opposed؟ Isn’t this a betrayal of the principles behind liberation movements everywhere. from South Africa to Latin America. that struggle must always serve the people, not be waged against them؟



Worse still, the statement claims the U.S. decision is based on “false reports.” Were the corpses of children, the bombed markets and hospitals, the massacres in South Sudan, the Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, and Darfur. just rumors؟ Were the tens of thousands of bodies under rubble and NGO reports from 2000–2016 all lies؟ And in this war, has the world ignored two years of documented audio-visual evidence simply because it “doesn’t understand Sudan’s reality”؟ Do we now live in a world that neither sees nor hears nor feels-just because the truth doesn’t suit our new allies؟



What irony! The statement decries “unjust American sanctions,” as if it were the U.S. sanctions that tore Sudan apart. not the fever of war that the SPLM helped fuel, not the incitement and justification echoed in its statements, not the lust for power reflected in its words, not the false fervor that masks a deep-seated sense of defeat.



And how historically absurd. the statement mentions that the sanctions come amid the “wide advance” of the armed forces and their allies. What advance؟ Do you measure victory by the number of burned cities؟ The number of displaced villages؟ The millions forced into camps, exile, and diaspora؟ Or the millions of starving women, children, and elders؟ Has “liberation” become synonymous with entrenching division and legitimizing armed dominance؟



Then, at the end of the statement, you address the Sudanese people and call for unity. What unity؟ The unity buried in mass graves؟ The unity awaiting its fate in displacement and starvation؟ The silenced voices crushed in the name of “victory” and “sovereignty”؟



Comrades .. better to enjoy your spoils of war, for this war is your opportunity .. In wartime, profiteering is lucrative .. for those without conscience or honor.

Arabic Forum