Hamdok in America

By Abdelrahim Mohamed Suleiman: Dr. Abdalla Hamdok's visit to Washington and New York appears on the surface to be a tour to end the war, but underneath, it is an attempt to break isolation. For two full years, the 'Samoud' coalition has failed to secure a direct meeting with the U.S. administration, limited only to marginal encounters with U.S. envoys in Nairobi and Addis Ababa—limited meetings that, according to U.S. reports themselves, never evolved into a negotiation track. Washington has dealt with the war in Sudan with clear apathy, and Hamdok wants to revitalize that relationship and achieve a breakthrough that has eluded him for four years. Hence, the Washington seminar titled 'Sudan to Where: A Vision of the Forces of the Declaration of Principles for Peace and Civil Transition' was held; a seminar that required pre-registration and limited seating, making it appear elitist rather than popular, thus achieving the highest failure rate in history. The timing of Hamdok's visit to Washington coincided with the same week the U.S. State Department refused to grant a visa to Al-Burhan to attend the General Assembly, the same week Trump's advisor Massad Boulos stated that military leaders should have no future in governance, and the same week the U.S. administration proposed a 90-day truce. This synchronization is not a coincidence. Hamdok is presenting himself to Washington as the ready-made civil alternative if the legitimacy of the military falls. He is putting forward the same formula as the Quad: no military solution, direct negotiations between the Army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), followed by a political process leading to a civil government. His delegation, aided by Emiratis in New York, explained to U.S. officials the necessity of linking the Quad and Quintet initiatives while addressing issues of justice and humanitarian truces. Surprisingly, even while in Washington, Hamdok could not unify his own ranks. Abdelwahid Mohamed Nour’s trip to join him faltered due to his Kenyan passport; the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party refused to recognize him as the head of the Forces of the Declaration of Principles; and Abdelwahid’s movement rejected the proposal to declare him a representative for 'Samoud' on the grounds that they are not part of it. The question remains: how will Hamdok convince the Americans to unite Sudan when he could not unite the delegation that traveled with him? These erupted differences confirm that the so-called civil bloc is a fragile entity seeking external legitimacy because it lacks internal legitimacy. Even more dangerous is what Hamdok requested. According to leaks, he made three demands: an unconditional humanitarian truce, expanding the arms embargo to cover all of Sudan and not just Darfur, and launching a political process in which the Army and the RSF do not determine Sudan's fate. This last demand directly serves the militia; expanding the arms embargo means preventing the Army from arming itself while the militia continues to arm through smuggling, and an unconditional truce means the militia remains in citizens' homes. In the final analysis, Hamdok is trying to tell Washington that there is a third party beyond the Army and the RSF, but Washington today is looking for a quick truce to help it before the Congressional elections and is not interested in building a long-term civil governance project in Sudan. America is the same America that did not grant Hamdok’s transitional government in 2020 more than a billion dollars as a loan guarantee from the World Bank instead of the 8 billion requested to stabilize the economy. America is not naive enough to give him governance on a silver platter today. Yes, the visit will succeed in the media, but it will fail in the street, because the Sudanese street had its say last Friday in the mosques of Khartoum, Omdurman, and all states, saying: 'We authorize the Army,' and those who seek legitimacy in Washington and New York are like 'one who stretches his hands toward water to reach his mouth, but it will not reach it. And the supplication of the disbelievers is not but in error.'