Imperialist hostility continues after Sudan’s vote

Election results in the Sudan national elections returned President Omar Hassan al-Bashir to power in Africa’s largest geographic nation-state. The ruling National Congress Party won an overwhelming majority with President Bashir gaining 68 percent of the vote and the frist vice-president and president of South Sudan, Salva Kiir, taking 93 percent in the southern region.

These were the first multi-party elections held in Sudan since 1986, when the results failed to resolve Sudan’s internal political crisis and prompted a military coup that brought Bashir to power in 1989.

Since the early 1990s, relations between the Sudanese government and Western imperialist countries have deteriorated. In 2008, the International Criminal Court in The Hague issued indictments against President Bashir and other leading government members accusing them of war crimes in their efforts to battle the rebel movements operating in Sudan’s western Darfur region.

In response to the elections, the Western imperialist states and their observers claimed that widespread irregularities occurred and that the overall outcome left much to be desired. The European Union declared openly that despite the internationally supervised elections, the ICC warrants against leading government officials should still be acted upon by arresting these political officials and bringing them to trial in the Netherlands.

Several opposition parties, based in both Sudan’s north and south, echoed the West’s complaints and even said the outcome of the vote was illegitimate.

Several parties had withdrawn from the elections, citing a lack of transparency and vote-rigging, yet their names remained on the ballot. A leading member of the northern-based Umma Party, Mariam Al-Sadiq, claimed the elections were “morally corrupt.” (Sudan Tribune, April 26) The Umma Party had announced its withdrawal from the race prior to the election.

Nonetheless, the African Union, the regional organization that represents the 53-member states on the continent, hailed the elections as a major step forward for the people of Sudan. The AU has opposed the ICC indictments against President Bashir and other Sudanese officials, maintaining that the court is jeopardizing the peace process and the overall political stability of the country.

Jean Ping, the AU commissioner, said in a statement that he commended “the people of the Sudan and Sudanese political parties for peacefully conducting the just-concluded multi-party general elections. These elections constitute a fundamental milestone towards realizing democratic transformation ... as espoused by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement.” (April 17)

In response to his victory, President Bashir said that the country would go ahead with a referendum on the future of the southern region in 2011. The CPA was the result of negotiations after a ceasefire between the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement and the central government at the conclusion of a 20-year civil war from 1983-2003.

President Bashir said after the election results announcement that “You [the people] gave us your trust. I reaffirm I will go ahead with the southern referendum on time and complete the peace process in Darfur.” (Al-Rayaam, April 25)

The president continued by pointing out that the Sudanese people “have achieved this moral victory before the eyes of the world in a civilized, high-class and shared manner.” Both parties to the 2005 CPA, which has prevented the resumption of fighting between the SPLM and the central government, accepted the results of the elections.

A report issued by the Sudan Tribune prior to the announcement of the results, stated: “The incumbent president ... is expected to remain the President of the Republic while Salva Kiir is expected to continue as First Vice President of the Republic and President of the semi-autonomous Government of Southern Sudan. Observers say that the agreement between the two respective ruling parties in the North and South, committing themselves to acceptance of the results before they are officially released, signifies a giant step towards maintaining the status quo.” (April 21)

Despite election, attacks against Sudan continue

Even though there were many international observers to the April elections in Sudan, calls for the destabilization of the government have not ceased. The United States observers, including the Carter Center, expressed their reservations about the election process and its outcome.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said in a statement: “It is obvious that the elections will fall short of international standards that are expected of advanced democracies ... The people’s expectations have not been met.” (Final Call, April 25)

Carter also expressed a lack of faith in the ability of the Sudanese people to conduct their own internal affairs by emphasizing the role of international observers. According to Carter, to ensure a qualified acceptance of outcome in the imperialist countries, Western monitors were essential.

“Their presence helps deter fraud and taking away the people’s rights to vote and international observers reveal lessons that have been learned, and how the future process of democracy can be improved.” (Final Call, April 25)

At the same time Carter “commended the Sudanese people for the generally peaceful nature of the voting process.” He also acknowledged that the more than 60 percent turnout far exceeded the normal participation of most U.S. national elections.

Other Western-based institutions and regional organizations reiterated calls for the effective overturning of the Sudanese government. Human Rights Watch, in a statement in the aftermath of the elections, said that irrespective of the outcome of the vote, President Bashir should not be immune from arrest and prosecution by the ICC.

The European Union declared in a statement that it welcomed “the largely peaceful conduct of the recent election” but “expressed concerns about the deficiencies in relation to international standards.” (Sudan Tribune, April 26)

This European regional organization of 27 member-states also continued to call for the arrest and prosecution of the Sudanese president and other officials, saying that “impunity for the most serious crimes under international law can never be accepted.” The EU called on Sudan “to cooperate fully with the ICC in accordance with its obligation under international law.”

Sudan has refused to accept the legitimacy of the ICC and maintains that the indictments against President Bashir are designed to undermine the sovereignty and independence of the country. Sudan is one of the emerging oil producing states in Africa and the government cites this as a major factor in Western efforts to replace the current leadership.

In the United States, anti-Sudan forces have criticized the Obama administration for not having a clear foreign policy toward the Bashir government. Last year Obama appointed a special envoy to Sudan, Scott Gration, who has attempted to open up dialogue between Khartoum and Washington.

Congressional Rep. Frank Wolf, one of the U.S. legislative voices calling for a more aggressive stance toward Sudan, recently stated in a letter to President Obama that Gration, “with your apparent blessing,” has not enacted the right policy toward Sudan. Others, such as New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, have called for the bombing of the Sudan Air Force to hamper its ability to act against rebel groups in Darfur. (The East African, May 10)

A statement by the so-called Save Darfur Coalition, which is campaigning for U.S. military intervention in Sudan, said that “President Obama must lead world leaders to not recognize President Omar al-Bashir as a legitimately elected leader and to press for meaningful steps towards political freedom in Sudan in the run-up to next year’s referendum to determine independence for South Sudan.” (Inter Press Service, April 20)

This statement by the Save Darfur Coalition came in the aftermath of the response by the White House to the Sudan elections. The Obama administration said that, “The United States notes the initial assessment of independent electoral observers that Sudan’s elections did not meet international standards.” (IPS, April 20)

The White House continued saying that “Political rights and freedoms were circumscribed throughout the electoral process, there were reports of intimidation and threats of violence in South Sudan, ongoing conflict in Darfur did not permit an environment conductive to acceptable elections, and inadequacies in technical preparations for the vote resulted in serious irregularities.”

In conclusion, the White House statement indicated that Washington “remains committed to working with the international community to support the implementation of outstanding elements of the CPA and ensure that the referendum happens on time and that its results are respected.”