Sudan’s crisis as Africa’s potential tinderbox

POSSIBILITIES OF CREATION of more countries in Africa are becoming more real. Out of the existing countries may emanate new ones. It has happened in the past and may yet happen again anytime soon. The struggle of the Saharawi Arab Republic (SAR) to become a fully independent state – though still hotly contested by Morocco – may soon give way to a new country of sovereign status. Two decades ago, before the turn of the century, Sudan was the largest country in Africa by landmass, with about 2.52 million km2 before it was divided into two countries. The next largest in landmass are Algeria and the DR Congo, with 2.38 and 2.34 million km2 respectively. But then, Sudan experienced an irreversible change that gave rise to South Sudan in 2011.

The attacks on Darfur region in West Sudan in 2003 may have left a huge scar on what remained of Sudan after the independence of South Sudan. Twenty years later, another round of attacks has been unleashed on the same region by the same set of Arab militia that was created by the regime of Omar al-Bashir. Now known as the Rapid Support Forces, a counterweight military arm that is made up of the Janjaweed militia which was co-opted into the mainstream government by al-Bashir is back at work in West Darfur, killing and maiming. It began with the murder of the governor of that region, after which a massacre of the genocide scale has been unleashed on the people. The recurrent attack calls into question any internal cohesion that the central government may have been claiming and why Darfur continues to be a target of such heinous attacks that seem more like ethnic cleansing.

The attacks on Darfur expose the institutional weaknesses of the state and the preponderance of destructive sentiments within Sudan. Al-Bashir, who ruled Sudan for 30 years, hid behind the influence of islamists who helped to prop him up as well as sustain him in power. It would appear on the surface as if the influence of the islamists had waned at the end of al-Bashir’s regime. But that would be a mistaken assumption. The case of Sudan throws up an important issue for those who seek to run any country with religious sentiments. It is on record that religious sentiments don’t help in running a modern state. For contrast, situations in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates are worth examining. If Saudi Arabia, the world headquarters of Islam is not running its government with Islam, it is therefore a mistaken notion for any other nation to do so.

Indonesia is easily the largest economy in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Its capital, Jakarta, is the headquarters of the ASEAN group, an inter-governmental organisation of ten Southeast Asian countries, the bloc’s biggest success in recent years. If Indonesia, easily the country with the largest population of Muslims has been running its government with Islamic sentiments, it would have been a different country by now. It has been posited that the Islamic state designation is not the appropriate model for Indonesia, given its diversity and is unlikely to become one. It has no state religion as it operates a secular constitution while most of its Muslims follow a moderate form of faith and the state recognises six religions. Its prosperity cannot be divorced from this singular decision as it is an investment destination with nominal GDP of $1.391,778 million out of the total $3.942,791 million for the entire ASEAN bloc.

By the last count, Egypt is currently the second largest economy in Africa after Nigeria by GDP, at $569 billion, overtaking South Africa that is now in the third place at $419 billion. President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi of Egypt did not leave Egyptians in doubt about the effects of promoting Islamism to the level of state governance. In September 2021, el-Sisi said Egypt’s National Human Rights Strategy was designed to promote social, economic, political and cultural rights. In a speech during a session on “Human Rights: Present and Future,” as part of the National Human Rights Strategy, el-Sisi said groups like the Muslim Brotherhood gnawed at the state and created a culture of doubt and mistrust. He therefore warned against allowing countries to be destroyed from within, creating millions of refugees and generations of extremists, and releasing untold damage on the wider region for decades. El-Sisi did not leave the Egyptians in doubt about the need for a long term plan in the field of human rights as his government aims to achieve the goals set out in Egypt’s Vision 2030.

The United Arab Emirate (UAE) is a regional economic hub in the Middle East. Although an Islamic country, it continues to be a strategic hub with business-friendly zones and a quickly growing economy, easily the second largest in the Arab world after Saudi Arabia, and ranking 14th in the 2021 Ease of Doing Business, with a GDP of $498 billion (AED 1.83 trillion) in 2023. The UAE is an asymmetric federation of seven Emirates, each governed by one influential family. The country is working hard to enhance its global competitiveness and business sectors, and to keep pace with global developments. It is the first country in the Gulf region not to have a Friday-Saturday weekend, thus bringing it in line with the non-Arab world. An official from Oxford Economics Middle East – an advisory firm – stated that the decision “will help internationally oriented businesses that are an important pillar of the economy and could attract investment.”

Those who try to defend the compatibility of state religion with a vibrant economy might want to cite Iran’s Islamic Republic as an example. Events over the years and in recent times have proved that as inappropriate. Iran’s domestic and foreign policies have particularly been hostile and have set the country’s government on a collision path with the citizens within and the West without. Morality Police – or Guidance Patrol – is an Islamic religious police squad in the Law Enforcement Command of the country. It enforces religious observance and public morality on behalf of the government based on its interpretation of sharia. The squad’s overbearing influence sparked a backlash and public outrage in 2022 after the death of Mahsa Amini, a young lady arrested for violating the rules on the public use of headscarf or “hijab.” In December, the government abolished (or, is it suspended?) the controversial morality police after more than two months of widespread protests. About a week ago, Iranians were back in the trenches again on protests after the re-introduction of the headscarf rules even though the enforcers may not be called by the same old name this time. The public response could be an acid test as to the popularity of such a government policy and possibly other Islamic-inspired public policies.

On the foreign policy frontier, Iran’s meddling with the affairs of many other countries through its Shia Islamic influence has been greatly questioned. The unease over suspicions and accusations that Iran’s Shia legacy is being spread for political gain is gaining ground. A trend has become obvious in countries where Shia influence is seen as fuelling the crisis, especially where Sunni sects earlier held sway. This includes the hostile and adversarial attitude found in countries with Iran’s Shia influence. Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and recently after Shiite Muslim guerrilla Hezbollah’s war with Israel, the hand of Iran has been visible in Iraq and Lebanon. According to the GIS Reports, “Iran’s hegemony in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen has significantly contributed to economic and social decline.” In particular, Yemen has been in turmoil for nearly a decade as the country has been troubled by Houthi, an armed militia group that has engaged the government in a deadly war of attrition that has led to deaths and displacement of millions of Yemenis combined. For context, however, the Houthis – an armed Zaid Shia revivalist movement with ties to Iran reportedly ignored Iranian advice to take over Sanaa in 2014.

The influence of islamists in the current crisis in Sudan has been noted and its impact could cost the continent of Africa very dearly. The immediate effects have started to be felt by neighbouring countries – particularly Chad – in the form of massive inflows of refugees from the Darfur region. The two sides to the crisis have been accused of exploiting religious sentiments – albeit in different ways. Observers have expressed worries over the seemingly intractable nature of the country’s on-going war in which ceasefires have been serially violated and talks on truce have repeatedly broken down without any success. The African Union and the regional bloc’s Inter-governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) have been largely ineffectual in reining in the two warlords spearheading the Sudan crisis. Unwittingly, the warring factions could be preparing the ground for global terrorists’ invasion of Sudan as experiences have shown in the aftermath of the crises in Iraq and Syria. The prevailing power vacuum since the April 15 outbreak of war in Sudan could enact the Somalia or Libya scenario in Sudan anytime soon.

Since 1991, Somalia has been in crisis after the exit of Siad Barre. That country has not recovered till now. Islamic State, al-Qaeda-linked groups, Boko Haram and other extremist movements have been known to aid, abet or enable today’s deadliest crises. They have complicated the efforts to end such crises. According to the International Crisis Group, “they have exploited wars, state collapse and geopolitical upheavals in the Middle East, gained new footholds in Africa and pose an evolving threat elsewhere.” In some parts of Africa, especially the ECOWAS region and Somalia, some movements now control territories, supplant the state and rule with a calibrated mix of coercion and co-option. As advised by the Crisis Group, “reversing their gains requires avoiding the mistakes that enabled their rise.” If the situation in Sudan is not quickly brought under control – which seems very unlikely – Sudan could become the next hotbed and new hub of terrorism and an operational base for terrorists from which other countries in East and Central Africa will be distressed with sporadic attacks.

With Sudan, Africa has come to a crucial crossroads politically, socially and economically. Difficulty in making any appreciable impact on its current crisis through external mediation is a cause for alarm. The religious aspect of the crisis will worsen the war situation even further and its impact will spread even beyond the territorial boundaries of Sudan as countries with similar religious sentiments begin to take sides through their direct or indirect involvements. Direct involvement could entail incursion of fighters and smuggling of arms into Sudan while indirect involvement could be in the form of propaganda or funding support in sympathy with factions. The funding aspect is particularly problematic in the sense that terrorism financing is already an existential problem in many countries of Africa, particularly in East, Central, North, South and West Africa. It has been surmised recently that some funds pass through formal financial channels as in ISWAP in West Africa. Although South Africa is not known for international terrorist attacks, the country – being Africa’s financial hub – has, however, been greylisted as vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financing and weak in dealing with the menace.

With such a weakness in the financial system of Africa’s most sophisticated financial hub, terror funding support might encounter least resistance in Sudan. The war may be prolonged and Africa may pay a heavy price in material and human terms. In the end, getting the government to work may take a long time. The crisis in Sudan is therefore an important lesson for African countries seeking to elevate religious considerations over secularity in the affairs of the state. It is a pointer to the destructive policy direction by the political actors seeking to elevate a religion over others, particularly in a multi-religious state such as Nigeria. If so much crisis could occur within a predominantly Islamic nation, it is easier to imagine how much more explosive such a crisis could be if political situations are not tactfully managed. Sudan could well be a time bomb for Africa’s social, political and economic stability. It has to be well managed to avoid what could tip the whole continent off the balance anytime soon.