In favour vs against Syndrome!!!
By: Huzifa Wadidi
Am I in favour of something?! If you are against it!! Am I against something، then you beg to differ!
For a long time, Sudan has been dominated by this primitive thinking pattern that fails to comprehend more than two sides: either with or against; a bilateral way of thinking where everything is viewed in binary terms, leaving no space for a third or fourth side, or even a tenth!
This gave rise to the «for vs against» duality, representing a lower level of duality or unity. There was also the communist/Islam-political dualism at a different level, the Hilal/El-Merreikh dualism in sports, and the Muhammad Wardi/Mohammed Al-Amin duet in the musical world.
In the Sudanese mindset, there is no barrier to being both a communist, a federalist, and a supporter of a rival at the same time, as they are seen as parallel ranks. Similarly, there is no contradiction in being both an Islam-political advocate, a nationalist, and a member of the Ansarist party simultaneously! However, being a supporter of the Khatimiah and the Ansar, or an Islamist and a communist at the same time is impossible. This is where the doctrine of binary opposites lies, resembling a Manichean worldview.”
“The ousted regime exploited our polarised mentality, which is both the worst and most despicable.
When it came to referring Bashir to the international criminal court (ICC), the government pushed us to choose between two options: supporting the referral or opposing it. If you supported the referral, you were labelled as a traitor. If you opposed it, you were perceived as supporting an extermination of human beings and condoing Bashir’s crimes!!
While there are countless options regarding this issue, the old system benefits from binary choices, and unfortunately, we are aiding it with our binary thinking.
Even today, the choices remain restricted: Are you in favour of the framework agreement or against it? And consequently: Are you siding with the army or with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)?
Moreover, you don’t have the right to claim that you are against war!! You cannot stay completely neutral about the “framework ” and yet support a political solution! Neither can you stand too close to them, but you should approach with caution, mindful of the potential failure of the framework!! It’s either for or against, with no other choice;
And if you are in favour of the agreement, you must continue supporting it even if it becomes evident that it won’t succeed in achieving a breakthrough and establishing foundations of a change and democratic transition.”
“If you are against the Framework Agreement, you must reject its outcomes. Additionally, if it succeeds in alienating the putschists, achieving the revolution’s goals, and collaborating with Yemen and Salawi, you shouldn’t outright refuse all of that. However, it is also your responsibility to actively work towards its failure.
Due to this dichotomous mentality, the Sudanese political theatre appears more intricate than Shakespeare’s theatrical writings, Russian literature’s novels (such as War and Peace, Crime and Punishment), and even Marquez’s Colombian novel, One Hundred Years of Solitude, or Agatha Christie’s detective novels. Within the realm of Sudanese politics, one scene reveals two opponents who use various permissible and forbidden weapons to slander each other without any restrictions or rules. However, in another scene, in a matter of hours, they may suddenly find harmony.”
“Today, due to their positions on the political spectrum, you will find a mix of Islamists, Baathists, communists, and various resistance committees. Leading figures such as Mohammed Al-Amin Turk, Manawi, Jibril and Ardol demonstrate a sense of harmony and unity.
Meanwhile, there are conferences attended by Ibrahim Al-Sheikh, Khaled Youssef, Al-Sudani, Al-Faki, Jafar Hassan, and Babiker Faisal, who are champions of reconciliation. They are joined by Hemeti and Burhan, along with Fadlallah (may his soul rest in peace) and Mariam El-Sadiq, claiming to be representing the nation.
To achieve progress in our political landscape, it is crucial to break away from binary (polarised) thinking and explore more options. However, the path to that is thorny. It requires mental and intellectual development, embracing multiple possibilities rather than simply favouring or opposing a single one. This process demands effort by schools, educational institutions, cultural and media agencies, politicians, columnists, all of whom need training. However, all efforts would only bear fruit when this relentless war comes to a halt.”