The Attack on the Army and the Threats Facing Sudan

Asharq Al-Awsat

2 days ago

A brutal civil war continues to wreak havoc in Sudan, and foreign actors are clearly fueling the conflict. Most recently, we saw the campaign to weaken the Sudanese army at the border triangle between Sudan, Libya, and Egypt. Some are now openly hoping for its defeat and others, behind the veil of calls for 'restructuring' it, are seeking to break the army apart.
One broad theme of this campaign is that the Sudanese armed forces are the former regime's (the National Congress Party) army and that it is a partisan militia rather than a national institution.
While the army does include figures affiliated with the NCP, men from across the political spectrum are also part of the army. Some have no political affiliations or ties to the former regime. Many of those fighting alongside the army today, including members of the joint forces and the newly mobilized battalions, fall into this category. Some of the youths had participated in the December Revolution and long opposed the previous regime. They cannot be labeled 'NCP'.
Despite political divergences, many international and regional actors agree that there is a fundamental need to preserve Sudan's state institutions, chief among them the armed forces. Indeed, the collapse of the army would not simply mean one faction's defeat in an armed conflict. It would mean the collapse of the state itself and introduce chaos and fragmentation. This consensus was not reached out of sentiment but a sober assessment of recent history.
There are many tragic cases of nations descending into violent turmoil following the disintegration of their national armies. The violence seen in Iraq after the 2003 invasion stands out: Paul Bremer's dissolution of the Iraqi army created a massive security vacuum that was quickly filled by non-state actors like al-Qaeda and ISIS. Iraqi cities became battlegrounds, state institutions crumbled, and the country drowned in sectarian bloodshed.
In Libya, overthrowing Gaddafi's regime without a plan to build a unified army left rival factions fighting a devastating war fueled by foreign intervention. In Somalia, the state collapsed after Siad Barre's regime fell, turning the country into several spheres of influence controlled by warlords. This led to a devastating civil war that went on for nearly two decades and eventually led to the emergence of extremist organizations such as Al-Shabaab.
In Africa, this catastrophe has taken a variety of forms. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire), the collapse of Mobutu Sese Seko's army led to the First and Second Congo Wars. Nine African countries took part in the hostilities that claimed the lives of millions. In Liberia, the disintegration of the army led to a civil war that killed nearly a quarter of a million people.
The lesson from these precedents is that the national army is the "pillar of the state:" If it collapses, the entire state collapses. If the Sudanese army collapses or is dismantled- whether due to internal conflicts, external pressures, or wrong political decisions- the country would find itself in one of the following catastrophic scenarios:
- Security and police agencies would become non-existent, leading to chaos and mass criminality.
- The security vacuum would unleash militias vying for power and wealth, and dangerous tribal and regional conflicts would open the door to new demands for secession, especially given the exploitation of marginalized regions.
- Cross-border conflicts would be inflamed as militias or armed groups seek refuge or resources.
- Terrorist groups would emerge, finding fertile ground for their activity in the chaos and insecurity. They are becoming increasingly active in the Sahel, not far from Sudan's borders.
- Instability would pose a threat to neighboring countries in the region.
- All of this unrest would lead to unprecedented humanitarian disasters, fueling famine and a refugee crisis.
In conclusion, the Sudanese army is the "last line of defense" against the state's collapse. Precedents show that dismantling national armies does not lead to democracy, but rather to chaos, especially in a volatile climate of aggravating regional and global conflicts.
Reforming the army is essential, and many other Sudanese state institutions must also be reformed. The military top brass has stressed the need for reform in light of the war, the integration of armed movements that signed the peace agreement, ending the era when there were multiple armed movements and armies in the county, and leaving weapons monopolized by the state. However, this reform should not, under any circumstances, entail dismantling the army or restructuring it in a manner that weakens it.
Sudan needs a strong army more than ever, to protect against conspiracies and foreign ambitions. A strong national army that ignores politics and devotes itself to protecting the homeland is the only bulwark against the aggravating assaults on Sudan.