Establishment.. A Government Without a Compass

Dr. Mohamed Osman: More than a year has passed since the formation of the establishment government, and the results remain below expectations. It has yet to succeed in transforming its political authority into a true executive apparatus. There is no clear program for state administration, no complete institutions, and no financial, economic, or development policies offering people a better quality of life. The government seems more preoccupied with asserting its political presence locally than with proving its capacity to govern. The problem starts with the Prime Minister. Instead of focusing on building the executive branch, defining the responsibilities of ministries, setting a clear and public government program with defined goals, deadlines, and accountability mechanisms, and building effective international relations, his activities are dominated by interviews, visits, and publicity meetings without tangible results commensurate with his position. These movements might be useful if they served a clear plan, but they become aimless spinning when they substitute for the real work expected of him in a fledgling state. The Prime Minister's achievements should be measured by the institutions he builds and the services, development, and international relations he facilitates. Most ministers in the establishment government live in the dark; their work is shrouded in ambiguity, and their performance shows no clear impact on people's lives or the development of their ministries. The problem is not a lack of statements or announcements of plans, but the absence of specific executive programs, clear priorities, and assessable responsibilities. After more than a year, there should have been at least clear signs regarding the management of education, health, the economy, foreign relations, and public services, yet the government has provided no indication that it is operating according to a comprehensive vision. The situation in the states reveals a significant aspect of the government's confusion. Gubernatorial positions remain vacant, and no governor has been officially appointed, while acting heads of civil administrations manage state affairs. While the Prime Minister is busy forming federal ministries and distributing sovereign positions, executive leadership in the states remains absent, even though these states are the direct arena for providing services, managing markets, stimulating agriculture, providing water, and driving local development. This reveals a clear defect in the prioritization; appointing governors, forming state governments, and building local administration with clear mandates—linked to specific plans, known resources, and actual monitoring and evaluation mechanisms—should be government priorities. The weakness is most apparent in the financial sector. Despite the appointment of a Central Bank governor, the absence of a clear monetary and fiscal policy remains perplexing. Furthermore, continuing to circulate old, expired banknotes without injecting sufficient quantities into the market has complicated transactions within the establishment zones. Organized networks have emerged to exchange bank balances for cash, with fees for obtaining cash reaching over 45%. This percentage is not a figure the government can ignore; it is a direct burden on the citizen and the merchant, contributing to the doubling of commodity prices without the citizen knowing, and it is evidence of a deep flaw in the relationship between bank balances and available cash in the markets. When withdrawing money from a bank account becomes this costly, the question shifts from the percentage itself to the competence of the appointed Central Bank administration in managing liquidity and resources, and to the ethical responsibility of the government toward its citizens. These facts are not isolated crises, but facets of one problem: a confused government that has not clearly arranged its priorities and has not determined how to transition from an authority born in war to a civil administration capable of organizing people's lives. A state is not built without managing public funds, distributing powers, planning services, ensuring the continuity of institutions, and linking every official to measurable results. Even in files where the government has achieved some tangible procedural steps, such as the Sudanese Certificate examinations, their impact remains questionable unless arrangements are completed to ensure students can continue their university education, obtain and authenticate their certificates, and know which authority will issue them and to what extent they are recognized outside the region. In contrast, opposition areas have begun to restore some state institutions and services despite the heavy problems and burdens they face. The comparison here is not a judgment that those areas have overcome their crises, but a reminder that the continuation of war does not exempt any authority from the duty of organizing administration and managing people's affairs. More dangerously, the impact of this poor performance may extend to the political project itself. When marginalized populations find no fair share of power, no effective local administration, and no tangible improvement in their daily lives, the gap between them and an authority claiming to represent them widens. Legitimacy is not earned through slogans, but through what people perceive as fairness in participation, real improvement in services, and actual capability in addressing their problems. When political promises contradict their lived reality, the credibility of the entire project becomes questionable. After more than a year, the problem is no longer that the establishment government is operating under difficult circumstances; that is a fact everyone realizes. The problem is that it has yet to show a real ability to transform these circumstances into a clear governance program, nor has it built institutions commensurate with the scale of the authority it announced. If it continues to improvise and prioritize political posturing over executive work, its stumbling will increase, and citizens will pay the price with their livelihoods, services, and the future of their regions.