Failed coup in Sudan: “Many soldiers are against a return to the old regime”

Published on : 09/21/2021 – 10:05 PM

This coup attempt is not the first to target the transitional government formed in Sudan after the ousting, in April 2019, of Omar al-Bashir, overthrown after 30 years of unchallenged rule. Imprisoned in Khartoum since his dismissal, the latter is currently on trial for his participation in the coup that brought him to power in 1989. The former leader is also wanted by the International Criminal Court for “genocide” and “crimes against humanity “during the conflict in Darfur, in the west of the country. France 24 takes stock of the democratic transition underway with Jérôme Tubiana, researcher specializing in Sudan.

France 24: Khartoum announced that it had foiled an attempted coup led by supporters of former President Omar al-Bashir. What is his influence still today?

Jérôme Tubiana: It is not Omar al-Bashir himself who has an influence, but officials of the former regime who are still at large. They have been driven from power, they have an interest in destabilizing the democratic transition.

The old regime was an alliance between a very powerful military apparatus and the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood, which had succeeded in infiltrating part of the army, and could also count on powerful intelligence services. The former director of the Sudanese security and intelligence services (NISS), Salah gosh, who is believed to be now in exile in Egypt, is considered one of the main instigators of just about every counterrevolutionary attempt since 2019.

How does the democratic transition advance more than two years after the revolution?

The transition remains fragile because the economy is doing badly. The government’s economic reforms are very liberal, of the type that the IMF is imposing everywhere. This negatively impacts the purchasing power of many Sudanese and they are therefore unpopular.

From a political point of view, things are not going so badly. The Prime Minister, Abdalla Hamdok, manages to play the role of common denominator between actors with diverse aspirations. The military is divided between the regular army and the paramilitaries, while civilians have ideologies ranging from the revolutionary left to the conservative right. But there is a real common interest of all these actors for the transition to go well. Coup attempts are foiled because many soldiers are not in favor of a return to the old regime.

How is the sharing of responsibilities between civilians and military going?

The division is real within the Sovereign Council, the body which directs the transition. Civilians have a real training role, it is they who push Sudan to reintegrate into the international community, and perhaps soon deliver former President Omar al-Bashir and other people wanted by the Criminal Court international. On the economy, we see that civilians are in charge. It’s more complicated on other sensitive issues like security sector reform and everything related to the military.

Finally, there are actors like the rebels who signed the peace, who escape the division between civilians and soldiers. They are soldiers because they still have armed forces but they are not part of the Sudanese security apparatus. They are revolutionaries and, politically, most of them have more connections with civilians. These actors are now putting the issue of peace and security in conflict zones like Darfur back at the center of the political equation.