Sudanese protesters shout slogans and wave national flags during a
protest outside the army headquarters in the capital Khartoum on April
22, 2019. PHOTO | OZAN KOSE | AFP
If there is ever formidable attestation that Africans are tired
of autocratism and yet have become prejudiced to perpetually putting up
with the burden of hijacked democracy, then one needs not look further
but at the face of the triple events that just unfolded in Algeria,
Sudan, and Mali within a span of less than three months.
Citizens’
resolve and pressure in the three countries all north of the Equator
resulted in the heads of state and government officials reluctantly
vacating office, thereby paving way for new political dispensations.
Characterised
by sustained and unwavering protests and sit-ins that have been largely
non-violent in content and scope, these unique uprisings point to a new
trajectory that could herald a political system of embraceable genre,
across continental Africa.
Granted, this prompts the question: Is Africa experiencing a new and innovative awakening?
Dispensational awakening does not occur quite often but when it does, it commands societal and ideological restructuring.
Africans, in particular, have had enough of both dictatorship and democracy.
Democracy,
in all its variant shades and machinations, has not apparently produced
appreciable outcomes as far most African countries are concerned.
Its
upholding and periodic rituals have instead proved to be subject to
manipulation, chaotic, and oftentimes engender constant fragility than
peace, security and development.
In contrast,
dictatorship—benevolent or malignant—has seemingly reached its point of
diminishing returns, as demonstrated by the cases of Sudan and Algeria.
For
nearly 30 years, Sudan has been ruled by one brutal autocrat, Omar
al-Bashir, who first came to power through an Islamic-backed coup in
1989.
Thereafter, he progressed by rigging elections and institutionalised Sharia law.
However, on April 11, 2019, his reign tumbled when a combination of factors conspired against him.
The
good news is that the ouster was less costly in terms of human life and
property losses, making an extraordinary departure from the usual
killings that have become instinctively Africa. Impressive has the
revolution been, thus closely watched continentally, if not globally.
Suffices
to deduce that whereas this approach is not entirely maiden (there were
previous uprisings in 1964 and 1985) to Sudanese people, its successful
impacts are certainly more likely to be replicated near and far. Here
is why:
- A velvet revolution
Contrary
to the covert stratagems by National Congress Party (NCP) insiders to
hoodwink the public that Bashir was toppled by military junta, it was
actually the Sudanese people who defenestrated the rogue leader.
As
usual, the Bashir’s conservative Islamic government tried to intimidate
the youth and women by introducing violence but the judicious coalition
remained undaunted.
The beauty of it all is that,
after three decades of defying catastrophic military incursions in
Southern Sudan, Darfur, Southern Kordofan, Blue Nile and eastern Sudan,
Bashir was ultimately forced to relinquish power by the determined
chanting of singing women and students.
Yes, it was the
absence of wielding of weapons, or stone-throwing, or property
destruction that diminished all burning desire to employ violence as
trap against the protesters.
The organisers and participants knew this trick and therefore avoided playing into the hand of the government security agents.
On
the other hand, the army, unlike in the past, was in solidarity with
the citizens and in fact provided significant protection against harm by
the national security radicals.
Any stubborn
insistence on violence by the government could have not only been
condemned internationally, but could have also triggered unforeseen
maximum response by relatives of the ordinary citizens within the armed
forces.
An unwinnable war by the government could have
ensued, setting the already economically-distraught country to
protracted instability.
- Collaterally diverse
The
survival of Bashir’s regime had thrived on Islamization,
inter-religious and inter-ethnic conflict, political patronage,
exclusion and marginalisation of the peripheries, false conspiracies,
and use of brute forces to suppress popular discontents.
These
strategies staled and could not keep up with cultural shifts,
increasingly educated citizenry, alternative communication channels made
possible courtesy of social media, and a more neutral and professional
army.
Partakers in the protests and sit-ins suspended all racial, religious, and ethnic differences in order to pursue the cause.
Voices
and pictures stemming from the demonstration scenes are unmistakably
clear that Sudanese across all walk of life were involved.
Muslims,
Arabs, Christians, black Africans, women, youth, students, unionists,
and professionals of varying manifestations participated.
The
Sudanese Professionals Association (SPA)—the body responsible for
organising and synchronising the protests synergies—is an amalgam of
various practitioners, who are of different gender, faith, and age.
Vivid
pictures and videos showed clearly that Sudanese regardless of their
ethnic background, colour, religion creed, gender, and profession mixed
freely, helped each other out, and joined in chanting slogans and
singing all kinds of songs.
Frantic attempts to divide
the protesters along ethnic line, such as Bashir’ claim that the
Darfurians caused the uprising due to their penchant for rebellion was
flatly rejected.
Last minute manoeuvre's by the
national security to scare or shoot the civilians were met by the
national army shooting back to protect the non-violent citizens.
This
unanticipated coalition showed the depth of the diversity and how the
people, rather than the leaders, can be more willing to coexist
peacefully under good governance.
- Internally autonomous
It
is typical in Africa, that every time organised groups such as
political parties, workers’ unions, or ordinary citizens undertake large
scale protests against certain government policy options, they get
accused for acting at behest of a foreign agent.
This
was not the case with Sudan and the government was convinced that the
protests were purely autonomous, and reflect the level of domestic
frustrations.
Further, the revolution was geographically disperse, not confined to Khartoum only. All major towns were engulfed.
Bashir
and his coterie of cronies could not decisively identify any single
foreign scapegoat in whom to direct blames and in order to rally regime
supporters.
The lack of external involvement or
interference left the kleptocratic government with extremely limited
options about how to confront the situation.
- Youth and articulate Afrocrats
Alaa
Salah, the young university student whose picture, taken while chanting
atop a car, went viral in the first 24 hours of it posting, is only 22
years old.
Her appearance at every corner in Khartoum
attracted instant crowd so eager to chant back after her as she recited,
“The bullet does not kill. What kills is the silence of people.”
There were more people so willing to listen to Ms Salah than to ever want to entertain an old Bashir.
Salah
was young, articulate, and naturally imbued with charismatic aura.
Dubbed variably as Kandaka (Nubian Queen) or “Lady Liberty,” Salah was
the youth diplomat of the revolution movement.
Her
portrait immediately appeared on several walls in the war-torn Syria as
youth there became even more motivated by her noble courage.
Music,
education exchange programs, and political changes across the globe
have imparted in the youth the essence of cultural and political
freedom, collaborative cooperation, and leadership renewal.
The
emergence of youthful leaders in the persons of Ethiopia’s prime
minister, Dr Abiy Ahmed, Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta, French
president Emmanuel Macron, Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau and
not least Barack Obama, has made most young demographics across Africa
to question the logic of gerontocratic leaders overstaying in power,
including unashamedly instigating constitutional amendments to extend
term limits.
The pace at which peaceful revolutions and
a compromising willingness to find common ground is picking up in
Africa is indicative of the fact that the continent, as a political
society, has been in search of a contextual model that fits its very
diverse and unique configuration.
A model which resists checkered leadership, unlimited dictatorship, and incompatible democracy is likely to ultimately emerge.
- Call it Afrocracy or Afrocratism
As
a cultural and political tool to contest outdated practices and
suppression of basic human rights, Afrocracy is poised to be based on
citizens consultation, dialogue, consensus building, inclusivity,
secularism, and delegated leadership.
As an evolving
phenomenon, it will contrast sharply with postcolonial reformists,
advocates for blind sovereignty and nationalism, and violent change
makers.
Moreover, its radical departure from entrenched
norms could contradict western version of democracy while equally
challenging retrogressive politics of postcolonial statehood.
Judging
from how Ethiopia settled on its current prime minister and the method
Sudan will apply to get a transitional civilian leader, Afrocratization,
as a process or revolutionary journey, is likely to bear features of
being less declaratory, less exclusive, devoid of elitist patronage, and
vibrantly youthful.
These cited strides could be
anecdotal but there is a plausible sense that as African consciousness
gradually grows, more so as contrasted against the foreign-derived
concepts, soon a realization of a system best-fitting to the
sensitivities of circumstantial realities may be devised and instituted.
This will mark the beginning of pragmatic Afrocratization.
Julius
Nyambur is an African policy consultant and researcher based in
Washington, DC. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect
any organisation.
No comments :
Post a Comment