Sudan’s Tagaddum seeks to build ‘broadest democratic civil front possible’

The Civil Democratic Forces alliance has invited hold-out rebel movements and political parties in Sudan for an urgent consultation meeting about the building of a broad democratic civil front against the ongoing war between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and Rapid Support forces (RSF). The resistance committees have not received an invitation.

On Saturday, the Civil Democratic Forces alliance, better known as Tagaddum (meaning progress in Arabic), consisting of the Sudanese Congress Party, the National Umma Party, the SPLM-Democratic Revolutionary Movement, and other members of the Forces for Freedom and Change-Central Council (FFC-CC*), sent invitations to Sudanese hold-out parties and groups calling on them to join “urgent and direct meetings to build the broadest democratic civil front possible and to discuss ways to end the current war”.

In a statement received by Radio Dabanga yesterday, Tagaddum pledged that its members “will spare no effort to end the war in the country” and underscored the importance of communicating with all “revolutionary and patriotic forces seeking to stop the war and bring about a democratic civil transformation”.

The chairperson of Tagaddum, former Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok, stated on his X account (formerly Twitter) on Saturday that “in continuation of our efforts to save the nation from the scourge of the devastating war”, he sent messages to the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North led by Abdelaziz El Hilu (SPLM-N El Hilu), the Sudan Liberation Movement under the leadership of Abdelwahid El Nur (SLM-AW), the Communist Party of Sudan, and the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, requesting an urgent meeting for consultations about “building the broadest front to stop the war, and to lay the building blocks for the Sudan of the future, a Sudan in whose skies the flags of freedom, peace, justice, and equality fly”.

Received

The SLM-AW confirmed they received the invitation. The movement’s spokesperson, Mohamed El Nayer, told Radio Dabanga that it will be discussed at the next meeting of the SLM High Leadership Council.

The movement itself “is seeking, with all actors in Sudan, to stop the violence in the country, as it is a national issue that requires all Sudanese to do their utmost to stop this war”.

El Nayer referred to the Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue proposed by the movement in former years to solve the root causes of the recurring Sudanese crises. “We were going to announce the inter-Sudanese dialogue in 2019, but it was delayed for multiple reasons. Yet we do believe that the Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue is the best solution,” he explained.

“Currently, the priority now is to end the war. After the violence has been stopped, we will be able to address the roots of the crises that led Sudan to wars since 1955 until today, and when the time comes, we will put forward this initiative.”

The SPLM-N El Hilu as well received Hamdok’s invitation, Mohamed Yousef, one of the movements leaders and former Minister of Labour, told Radio Dabanga, without providing further details.

The Arab Socialist Baath Party announced it has agreed to the meeting, while the Communist Party has not yet announced its position.

Addis Ababa Declaration

On January 2, the Civil Democratic Forces alliance, represented by Hamdok, signed an agreement with RSF Commander Mohamed ‘Hemedti’ Dagalo in Addis Ababa, in which the paramilitary group agrees “to immediately and unconditionally stop hostilities” in direct negotiations with the SAF provided that the Tagaddum leaders agree with the army commanders “to adhere to the same procedures”.

Hamdok had also invited Lt Gen Abdelfattah El Burhan, commander-in-chief of the SAF for a similar meeting but has not received a response so far.

The signing of the agreement elicited diverse responses from Sudan’s various political stakeholders.

El Burhan warned Tagaddum “to stay away from the RSF leader if they are patriots” and “not to turn against the SAF as the militia did” in a speech on Friday.

The Darfur Bar Association (DBA) expressed a mix of approval and criticism, welcoming the agreement’s focus on humanitarian issues but pointed out flaws related to the political process and the potential legitimisation of military involvement in civilian affairs.

Ahmed Babiker, leading member of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, strongly criticised the agreement, viewing it as a setback for civilian forces and a potential catalyst for the militarisation of political life. He warned against giving legitimacy to armed groups seeking a political role.

The Communist Party of Sudan, which in 2019 refused to talk with the junta and withdrew from the FFC in end 2020, also denounced the Addis Ababa Declaration, warning of “repeating any form of partnership with the military”.

In a statement on Saturday, the party’s political bureau said that Tagaddum “has no right to deviate from its duties to stop the war” and directed sharp criticism concerning “the partnering with the military and RSF and circumventing the principles of impunity”.

The bureau stressed the importance of “opening safe corridors for relief items to reach those affected and securing the return of the displaced people to their homes” – an issue also cited in the Addis Ababa Declaration.

The party said it categorically rejects “calls by affiliates of the Al Bashir regime on civilians to take up arms,” and warned that this development will turn the current RSF-SAF conflict into a civil war “that will tear apart the country’s unity, threaten regional and international security, and open the way for international intervention”.

According to the Communist Party the only step forward constitutes of “building the broadest mass coalition to stop the war and restore the revolution, until it achieves its goals of democratic civil rule and accomplishes the tasks of the transitional period”.

Resistance committees

The resistance committees** that signed the Revolutionary Charter for People’s Authority in September 2022, have not been invited yet by Tagaddum to join the building of “the broadest democratic civil front possible”.

In a statement, received by Radio Dabanga yesterday, the grassroots committees announced their “firm and supportive position for all options to end the war and address its roots completely” but criticised the Addis Ababa Declaration for omitting “pivotal issues”.

The Tagaddum-RSF agreement “did not refer to all parties to the Juba Peace Agreement”, signed in October 2020 by the Sudanese government and the Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF) rebel alliance. “This can be considered a deliberate marginalisation by both parties of the rebel movements, in particular because of their position against the RSF.”

The grassroots activists described the Tagaddum-RSF approach to war and peace as fragmented, “in a way that only leads to a re-experience of earlier fragmented bilateral agreements signed in Naivasha, Abuja, Asmara, Cairo, and Juba, which turned out to be completely unsuccessful”.

The statement in particular faulted the political declaration for not addressing “the humanitarian crisis of the Masalit community and their mass displacement [from in West Darfur], caused by ethnic cleansing and genocide, and the occupation of their land by the RSF and their allies”.

Therefore, a comprehensive transitional justice process is needed, and should be part of any agreement. “Following the principle of non-impunity, all leaders directly involved in human rights violations should step down, to ensure the progress of justice procedures” – though the grassroots committees do not deny “the impossibility of the RSF acknowledging all its records of violations in the wars in Darfur and the Nuba Mountains, and the violent dispersal of the Khartoum sit-in” in June 2019.

The committees also indicated that the declaration “does not address the real risks associated with the reality of demographic change” and warned that it would lead to the accumulation of grievances and to the deepening of the crisis of the historical Sudanese conflict linked to conflicts over land.

---

* The FFC has been prone to divisions since its formation in early January 2019. The National Umma Party (NUP), the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), and the Socialist Arabic Ba’ath Party, which already witnessed internal splits during the reign of Al Bashir, fragmented further due to opposing views and standpoints on talks with the military. The Communist Party of Sudan withdrew from the FFC in the end of 2020. The mainstream Ba’ath Party left the coalition two year later. The FFC-CC now  consists of several (split-off) political parties and new groups such as the SPLM–Democratic Revolutionary Movement (DRM)​.

** The resistance committees that emerged during the 2018 December Revolution played an incredibly important part in Sudan’s pro-democracy movement ever since. The -mainly young- members emerged as watchdogs making sure that political parties and groups would not compromise on the ideals of the December revolution in exchange for government power, prominent Sudanese political scientist Atta El Battahani wrote in 2021. In November 2020, a year after a democratic transitional government was formed by Hamdok, the FFC began discussing the formation of a new legislative council. The resistance committees questioned FFC’s distribution of the 300 parliamentary seats and withdrew from the discussions. A legislative council was not formed. In January last year, the resistance committees of Khartoum began establishing local legislative councils in the city’s districts, which was to lead to the formation of a national parliament.