Is 30, June,1989, the last coup in Sudan? by Muhyi Eldeen Homeida

Muhyi Eldeen Homeida
I write to you from the coast of the Red sea reflecting on the third democratic experience in Sudan towards which reacted with irony Zain El abbedin Elhendi an astute politician as he remarked if it were snatched by a dog, we wouldn't wave a way. On other side of the same ridiculed experience, there is Turabi, the mentor of Islamists in Sudan. He once became bored with the ring of fire-power and proposed that the political scenery should rotate from liberal to military and then liberal again. His perception lack the eloquent popular imagination but the most serious aspect in it it exemplifies an action plan.
El shroug, a Sudanese T.v channel wondered if 30, June, 1989 coup is the ultimate military adventure in Sudan. Yes, I replied with no hesitation. On 30, June, 1989, a bunch of patriotic or free active officers met secretly after notifying the political figures . The officers moved their troops in the afternoon to occupy military sites, the Republican Palace and soon there after forwarded from the General Command a signal to all units that the army had taken over. The music of marching band played on the T.V and Radio while at intervals, the announcer kept alerting to a forthcoming communiqué to keep the suspense of an audience a vid to knowing something. There are a number of reasons that makes today masterminding such a traditional coup impossible. Firstly, You can't allege containment of situation by a mere control of media or press sources because there are plenty of freelance News service that can shape the public understanding of what takes place and in some places permitted riots in the streets. That proves the role of media nowadays in exploring an intrigue and even inciting communitarian violence. Secondly, the universal and regional conditions discourage any coup. Thirdly, the regime in Khartoum that took the rein of power on 30 June, 1989 shifted to the electoral legitimacy which is tightly guarded . But why bother ? the separation of South Sudan, the on-going state of war in Darfur, the Blue Nile and Nuba Mountains brought international pressures that imposed compromises and reduced political authoritarianism that we have known some years. Finally, the army intervened as result of abysmal political failure and that option doesn't exist now so politicians have the responsibility of securing a place to Sudan in the world. There are two inevitable choices: first, the is prospect of liberal political life that is as whole some as food and involves the peaceful transfer of power and the present dialogue hopefully will make the peaceful devolution of power realizable. The failure of dialogue doesn't augur well for it means relapse into an anarchy.