The Machakos Framework signed last July has now reached its critical point, as the round of talks which started on 6th July is considered to be the one that could make or break it for Machakos. Things have not got off to a good start. After one brief look at the draft framework presented by the negotiators, the Khartoum delegation stormed out. The negotiations are now postponed until 23 July, but the government’s outright rejection of even the modest compromises envisioned in the draft framework agreement suggests that the talks will not go smoothly. President Omar al Bashir appeared on TV saying if the mediators insisted on the draft, "let IGAD and those behind it go to hell", said Bahir. He wouldn’t compromise on any aspect of the Sharia - not the type of language normally associated with diplomacy. The President stressed that his government "is committed to peace but not to Surrender", quoted from radio.

It was all supposed to be very different. In April 2003 both President al- Bashir and the leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army, Dr. John Garang at their second meeting In Kenya expressed their commitment to peace and they hoped that a final peace agreement could be reached by the end of June this year. Now June has come and passed with no sign of peace. President al-Bashir at his 14th anniversary celebration in Juba told the Southern people that peace was certain. "We will come to Juba after a month or so to celebrate achieving peace and the end of war….there will be no more death, there will be no more rifles and instead there will be hospitals, electricity and public service" said el-Bashir. The Chief IGAD mediator, Lt. General Sumbeiywo predicted that peace could be concluded by the middle of next August to end twenty years of war in Sudan. "The peace process is going well… Both parties seem to be committed to the process" said Sumbeiywo. This clearly suggested that peace was imminent.

However, many observers are sceptical about peace being concluded by August, as the road to peace for Sudan is still long. While there is a strong desire and a cry for peace across the country many issues still remain unresolved. These issues have not been adequately discussed or addressed. If the parties and the mediators want to speed up the peace process to get something signed in the next few months without addressing some of the core issues then the whole thing will not work. We believe that the two parties, particularly the Government, lack sincerity and they are not seriously committed to peace. The fact that many of the dividing issues remain unresolved is an indication that the Machakos Protocol is not working, which could put the entire peace process in jeopardy. One of the main difficulties in which IGAD found itself is the strategy which it adopted to end the war in Sudan by establishing two systems of self-government in the country based on religion. This is to create two states: An Islamic state in the North and a secular state in the South of the country. Of course such an approach has complicated the whole issue since it ignores the complexity and the diversity of the Sudanese social composition. By looking into the complexity of the Sudanese society and the recent demographic changes in the country it would be impossible to achieve a workable peace by dividing the country into two separate self-governing states.

We must understand that the Sudanese conflict is not about religion or ethnicity alone nor it is about conflict between "North and South" which the two parties always tend to claim but it is due to many complex factors that have contributed to this conflict which include religion and ethnicity. The three marginalized areas in the geographical centre of the Sudan -Nuba Mountains, Southern Blue Nile and Abyei consider political power, wealth sharing and their identity are the main underlying causes which need to be fairly addressed at the IGAD peace talks. These areas took up armed struggle more than eighteen years ago fighting alongside the SPLA for justice and against marginalisation and discrimination. The Beja in the eastern Sudan also took up armed struggle many years ago and more recently the people of Darfur in western Sudan joined the struggle. All these five major areas in northern Sudan are fighting not only for justice but they also need to assert their political rights, the right to power sharing, wealth sharing and the right to determine their destiny and the future of their country. It is clear that these marginalized areas will not settle for anything less than to have their full rights accepted and settled within the ‘Machakos Framework’. Failure to address the issue of these areas could undermine any deal that is reached between the GoS and SPLA/M. Therefore, it is now the duty of IGAD mediators and the western partners to ensure that the grievances and the injustices of these marginalized areas are properly addressed and incorporated in any comprehensive peace deal.

At the last round of talks in Kenya which started on 7th April and ended on 17th the two parties did not agree on any of the issues discussed. The SPLA/M wanted 40% of the total seats in Parliament and in civil administration, 60% of oil revenue and to retain its forces during the interim period. The Government refused all the demands made by the SPLA/M. They completely ignored the issues of the marginalized people. This undoubtedly created a dilemma for IGAD.

To break the deadlock and rescue the negotiations from collapsing, the Chief IGAD mediator, Sumbeiywo, made an important visit to Sudan at the beginning of last June to meet all the stakeholders on both side of the conflict. He met government officials, political party leaders, members of the opposition, civil society organisations and President al Bashir. He then went to meet the community in Kadugli, South Blue Nile, Abyei and the SPLA/M leader and the Southern community in the South. Sumbeiywo seems to be pleased with the outcome of his latest mission. "We discussed all the outstanding issues on power sharing and wealth sharing, security arrangements and issues on the three conflict areas which fall under Kenyan mediation where I received very good response", said Sumbeiywo.

However, the majority of the Sudanese people still believe that both the Government and the SPLA are not seriously discussing the issues to reach a peace settlement. The fact that the two parties continue to deny the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the marginalised areas from representation in IGAD peace process is likely to have some impact on the outcome of any agreement reached by the parties. Many still believe that both parties do not represent the views and the aspirations of the majority of the Sudanese people. The National Islamic Front (NIF) Government in Khartoum does not represent the views and the aspiration of the Northern Sudanese, nor does the SPLA/M represent the views and aspirations of the whole of the Southern Sudanese. This means that any peace agreement reached in Machakos must be accepted by all the Sudanese people otherwise it is doomed to failure.

The GoS continues to refuse a democratic solution to the central conflict areas using many tactics and manipulations to suppress other voices. This was clear when a delegation from the United Sudan National Party wanted to meet Sumbeiyow while in Khartoum and were prevented from meeting him. The delegation had to use other means to meet the IGAD Chief mediator and the person who organised this meeting was questioned for five hours by security men. In addition many members of the opposition were prevented from attending the NDA press conference. At the beginning of this month, the Sudanese authorities arrested five of the opposition activists who helped to draft a document known as the "Khartoum Declaration" which called for Khartoum to be a national "secular" capital in the event of a peace deal being reached. This kind of attitude by the Government is likely to frustrate the negations which will create further dilemma for the mediators. It is important that IGAD should be aware of these tactics which are intended to delay the peace process.

While many Sudanese support IGAD’s efforts to end the war in Sudan they are casting doubt on the Machakos Protocol bringing a workable peace for Sudan. This concern has also been expressed by some observers. The IGAD Chief Negotiator announced last week that the negotiation between the GoS and SPLA/M is to resume at the Kenyan Rift Valley of Nakuru on Sunday 6th July. "The negotiation in Nakuru will be the final phase of the talks during which the parties will prepare the final documents they expect to be signed in the middle of August," said Sumbeiywo. At this last round of talks, the parties will discus the outstanding core issues of power sharing, wealth sharing and security arrangements during a six-year transition period.

We believe power sharing and wealth sharing and security arrangements could be resolved if there are genuine compromises by both sides. However, the two other issues of Islamic laws in the North and the issue of the marginalized areas are going to be the hardest and most difficult to resolve. Unless the regime in Khartoum is removed from power to pave the way for an immediate broad national government which will prepare for the election, it will be difficult to resolve these two contentious issues. It will be difficult if not impossible to achieve a just and lasting peace for Sudan when the majority of the Sudanese people do not accept the final deal reached by the two parties.

In June the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a report on Sudan’s Other Wars, which calls on IGAD not to ignore the issues of the marginalized areas because of "the clear danger that as long as these groups continue to feel marginalized and their views are not respected in the IGAD process, the pull toward violence will remain compelling". The report was extremely concerned about the strategy adopted for resolving the Sudanese civil war: "The two-party framework in which Sudan’s peace talks are being held is not adequately addressing all the country’s current armed conflicts: especially the long-running rebellions in the "Three Areas" (Ayei, the Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile) in the North, and the more recent outbreak of armed conflict in Darfur in Western Sudan. The discontents in these regions have thus far largely been viewed as of secondary importance to those of the South, but they must be taken into account if a sustainable national peace agreement is to be reached". IGAD mediators and western partners have no excuse if they ignore the issue of the marginalized areas in northern Sudan as this could be a recipe for another war - which must not be allowed to happen.

The Government walked away form the peace talks in NaKuru last week has put the peace process at crossroads and the window of opportunity for peace could be missed. The Government commitment to imposition of Sharia law and its refusal to suspend Islamic law from capital Khartoum during the transitional period considered to be the major obstacles to peace. Denying others from religious rights and expression contradicts the international laws. There can be no peace in Sudan while the rights of others are suppressed. We believe that to save ‘Machakos Framework’ the Government must compromise on all issues including secularism of the capital Khartoum and the separation of religion from state otherwise it will be too late.

Suleiman Musa Rahhal