Sudan: Post-Trauma Security

The Truth Perspective, Dr. Ibrahim Shaglawi: The return of the Sudan Center for Counter-Terrorism Studies to operations in Khartoum represents an important step toward restoring national expertise in risk assessment and security decision-making. Lt. Gen. Hanafi Abdullah, the center's Director General, revealed on Thursday that efforts are accelerating to prepare the Sudanese Counter-Terrorism Strategy, while Maj. Gen. Issa Adam Abakar presented a vision document for national construction, which addressed strategic challenges and priority decisions. However, the importance of these moves does not stop at preparing documents, but extends to building national capacity to deal with intersecting threats, from terrorism and organized crime to cross-border activities. This requires an approach that links knowledge to decision-making and shifts state institutions from reacting to risks to anticipating them, thereby enhancing national security and turning plans into effective tools. But it is certain that the challenge is not in the speed of preparing the strategy, but in its ability to penetrate the roots of threats and uncover the vulnerabilities that allow them to grow. Terrorism is not faced by security agencies alone, but through the integration of security, justice, education, media, and social policies, within clear responsibilities. A state that waits for a danger to confront it remains a prisoner of reactions, while a state that understands its causes and dries up its sources possesses the initiative in protecting its security. The usefulness of the center's return will be measured by what it accomplishes on the ground, that is, by its ability to translate the vision into implementable policies. Here, I believe that the media should not remain on the margins of the strategy, but be its foundation. Confronting terrorism does not take place in the security field alone, but in public awareness as well, where trust is formed or the environment for misinformation and incitement expands. Without a responsible discourse that addresses society and understands its concerns, the treatment will remain incomplete, no matter how efficient the security apparatuses are. The war has revealed that possessing weapons does not necessarily mean possessing security, and that a state that is unable to protect its borders and the cohesion of its society becomes vulnerable to penetrations that transcend the military field into the economy, politics, and awareness. Therefore, the question that should occupy Sudan today is not how do we restore lost security and peace, but how do we prevent the production of the conditions that led to that? The war, with the legacy of weapons proliferation, instability in border control, decline in services, and sharp social polarization it left behind, has made the concept of counter-terrorism more complex. This environment may provide opportunities for networks of extremism, organized crime, and illicit financing, but it does not mean that all forms of chaos are terrorism, nor that every political disagreement is a security threat. Here, the necessity of refining legal definitions for terrorism, extremism, organized crime, and rational political action emerges; confusing them not only wastes resources and undermines trust, but may also lead to human rights violations and the expansion of grievances, fueling the causes of security threats instead of containing them. In my estimation, counter-terrorism begins with the state's responsibility to secure borders, conduct intelligence, dry up funding and recruitment, enforce the law, and protect rights. The roles of religious, educational, media, and community institutions integrate with this responsibility without replacing it. The state may not ask society to protect security before it has completed building institutions capable of protecting it. Sustainable security is achieved by the state reclaiming its role in delivering justice and providing services, education, and opportunities for a decent life; these are not demands postponed until after security, but its foundations. Regional and international cooperation is also necessary to face cross-border threats, provided that it helps Sudan protect its security without compromising its sovereignty or imposing priorities that do not stem from its national interests. According to #TheTruthPerspective, post-trauma security means building a state that does not just confront threats internally, but possesses the ability to cooperate regionally and internationally to face cross-border risks without compromising its sovereignty. The success of the national counter-terrorism strategy depends on linking security to justice and development, addressing the roots of imbalance, and integrating national effort with regional and international cooperation. Sustainable security is not created by force alone, but by an effective state, an immunized society, and productive partnerships that respect national interests and sovereignty. Best regards, Monday, October 19, 2026. Shglawi55@gmail.com The post Sudan: Post-Trauma Security appeared first on Sudanaile.