Face of Truth | Ibrahim Shiglawi Al-Burhan’s Speech: The Military Institution Can… The speech of Sudan’s Sovereignty Council Chairman and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, sparked wide reactions across local and regional media, as well as on social media platforms. The speech, delivered yesterday during his participation in a conference supporting e-learning initiatives and technological infrastructure in the Darfur region, not only highlighted the state’s interest—at the highest levels—in Darfur’s issues by placing them among national priorities but also carried decisive political messages directed both internally and externally. Some of these messages came in response to statements by Khalid Omar Yousif, aired on Al Jazeera, alleging ongoing communication between the leaders of the "Sumood" movement and both al-Burhan and the leader of the Rapid Support Forces militia, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as “Hemedti.” This claim appeared to aim at causing rifts within the internal front, based on a previous invitation from al-Burhan that conditioned entering any political process on ceasing support for militias—a condition "Sumood" cannot meet for various reasons that will be elaborated upon in a future article. For now, however, the focus is on deconstructing the political and security dimensions of the speech, which has garnered significant attention within the political arena. Although e-learning issues in Darfur took center stage in the speech, the emphasis on supporting education as a fundamental human right and a state responsibility carried symbolic significance, fortifying society against the repercussions of war, according to "Sudan News." Al-Burhan highlighted the role of local institutions such as the Ministries of Higher Education and Communications, alongside international organizations like UNICEF, in promoting e-learning. He also spotlighted the impact of the war, which has deprived over ten million children of education, using this as a tool to condemn the Rapid Support Forces militia and label them as terrorists. The speech invoked Sudan’s historical role as a contributor to Africa’s independence, juxtaposed against criticism of certain African countries that al-Burhan accused of conspiring against Sudan. This dichotomy reflects a dual sentiment of pride in national heritage and anger at external interventions, which, according to him, aim to impose political solutions or unpopular figures, such as Abdalla Hamdok, whom he named explicitly. Al-Burhan emphasized that such attempts are rejected, effectively shutting the door on these efforts. Al-Burhan also addressed the international community, particularly the African Union and the United Nations, affirming Sudan’s rejection of any external tutelage. He argued that betting on unpopular political figures, such as leaders of the Forces of Freedom and Change, is a waste of time and an attempt to impose "non-national" solutions. He criticized efforts to form a parallel government from abroad as unacceptable and condemned by the Sudanese people. National security prominently featured in al-Burhan’s address, with the army’s central role emphasized. He reiterated the need to build a professional, unified national army with a purely national doctrine, free from partisanship and politics. Responding to claims of the army’s politicization and alleged ties to Islamists, al-Burhan clarified that the national doctrine tolerates no ideological influences, stressing that the war will continue until the rebellion is eradicated. In discussing friendly nations and the international role, al-Burhan underscored regional solidarity with Sudan, referencing countries that proposed a resolution condemning the Rapid Support Forces militia at the recent African summit. He also cited the positions of states that refrained from attending the Addis Ababa conference, which he described as an attempt to whitewash the "aggression against Sudan." Directly addressing international actors, he warned against supporting internal factions lacking popular acceptance. The speech included a reaffirmation of ongoing military operations against the Rapid Support Forces militia until the country is "cleansed." This stance reflects al-Burhan’s view of the conflict as not merely a military battle but a struggle to preserve Sudan’s sovereignty and national identity. His insistence that political solutions must emerge from within, rather than through external pressures, reinforces national sovereignty as a cornerstone of the next phase. Al-Burhan’s speech in Port Sudan can be interpreted as a clear declaration of principles that the military leadership seeks to assert in the current phase. The speech highlights the army’s desire to position itself as the sole guardian of national sovereignty and Sudan’s unity amidst escalating crises. By focusing on building a professional national army, al-Burhan conveys a dual message: internally, he aims to reassure the Sudanese people that the military institution is committed to protecting their interests, free from partisanship, and externally, he rejects any international interference that might impose solutions on Sudan or threaten its independent decision-making. But how can this speech be understood in light of recent calls from activists and politicians to extend the military’s rule for an additional five-year transitional period? Undoubtedly, such demands reflect a general sentiment in certain circles that Sudan’s current priorities are not about changing governance but rather about restoring security, peace, and rebuilding social cohesion. The calls for extending military rule seem to stem from a belief that "political parties" are currently unprepared to manage the country, given the complexity of the political scene and the inability of civilian forces to formulate a unifying vision. From this perspective, al-Burhan’s speech can be understood as an indication that the military institution presents itself as the sole guarantor of achieving security and peace, focusing on defeating rebel militias to ensure stability. Alongside rebuilding the state, al-Burhan proposes a vision for creating a professional national army as a foundational step toward restoring state institutions, as well as fostering social reconciliation and mending the social fabric. These objectives can indeed be achieved by the army, given its current status as the cohesive national institution with a vision trusted by the Sudanese people at large. Thus, in my view, al-Burhan’s speech reflects the military institution’s vision for Sudan’s present and future. With the strength of arguments related to restoring security and rebuilding the state, this proposition requires support to enable the military to continue governing the country, thereby closing the door on political opportunism under the guise of legitimacy or regional and international blackmail. May you remain in peace and wellness. Tuesday, February 18, 2025 [email protected]