The Face of Truth: Ahmed Haroun… Messages That Disrupt the Opponents
Ibrahim Shglawi
Amid the efforts led by the international Quartet to reshape the Sudanese political landscape—largely excluding local actors—Islamists are demonstrating a remarkable ability to maneuver tactically and exert substantial influence. This is no longer a mere perception, but a consistent feature of the Islamic movement’s engagement in Sudan’s political scene, as discussed in our previous article: “The Quartet’s Engineering and the Islamists’ Tactics.”
Within this context, the calculated media appearance of National Congress Party leader Ahmed Haroun through Reuters stood out as a tactical move with strategic undertones. It was not simply a media statement, but a deliberate message directed more at external audiences—particularly the Quartet—than at domestic ones. The Quartet envisions a political transition that excludes Islamists, believing it will foster stability. However, the Islamists view this approach as a gross oversimplification that only deepens the political crisis rather than resolving it.
Choosing Reuters was no coincidence. The party, which governed Sudan for decades, understands the power of media channels and the importance of messaging through credible international platforms. Through this widely respected agency, Haroun conveyed a clear message: “We are present and will not be excluded—not today, not tomorrow,” signaling directly to international and regional actors who may believe otherwise.
The interview carried a dual-message strategy. Domestically, it reassured supporters that the National Congress Party remains intact, despite bans, collapse, and demonization, and is actively reorganizing to adapt to the current phase. Externally, Haroun presented his party as a disciplined political force, ready to engage with the transition—albeit on equitable terms, not under imposed conditions.
Since the regime’s fall, international actors have attempted to impose a “ready-made” political model—a liberal civil framework backed by global powers—that sidelines Islamists and seeks to criminalize them politically. Yet, the Islamist current has responded with a dual approach: patient waiting combined with marginal engagement until the right moment emerges.
Haroun’s remarks reflect this approach. By adopting a rational tone that emphasizes electoral processes, the army’s role in the transition, and the possibility of national consensus, he seeks to reintroduce the Islamist movement as a force for stability—one that cannot be dismissed or bypassed.
Notably, Haroun emphasizes the need for a long-term role for the military, proposing a “hybrid governance” model where the army retains sovereignty until current threats are resolved. This is not a call for traditional military rule, but an attempt to propose a uniquely Sudanese model that balances civilian and military authority. It also implicitly rejects the Western model that the Quartet is marketing as a ready-made solution.
His proposal for a public referendum to elect a military leader is a particularly creative tactic. It grants popular legitimacy to the military’s presence while disrupting the Quartet’s roadmap, which seeks to confine legitimacy within civilian forces. Moreover, it represents an effort to bypass ongoing international and regional pressure on the Sudanese army to complete the transition process.
The interview came at a critical time, amid political vacuum, unstable alliances, and the civil actors’ declining capacity to offer a convincing alternative. In this fragile landscape, the Islamist movement re-emerges—through Haroun—as a politically “mature” player proposing itself as a viable partner in shaping Sudan’s future, without submitting to any external agenda that ignores its social roots and political weight.
Within this framework, Haroun’s smart rebuttal of Reuters’ claims that Islamists support the army with “thousands of fighters” can be understood as a strategic distancing. Rather than an outright denial, it was a calibrated narrative: “Yes, we support the army, but we do not control or lead it.” This careful positioning aims to maintain a balance between political support and military involvement, avoiding potential international backlash that could harm the Islamist movement’s political image.
Whether this move represents a strategic shift or a tactical maneuver, it reveals a mature awareness within the Islamist camp that reentry into the political arena demands new tools, flexible rhetoric, and pragmatic engagement. Nevertheless, the success of this path remains contingent on the ability of political and military forces to craft an inclusive national project that prevents both exclusion and the unilateral return of the old regime. This delicate balance is the key to a true political transition—and the best safeguard against excessive foreign intervention.
Through this #Face_of_Truth, it becomes evident that Sudan’s political scene is experiencing one of its most complex phases since the fall of Bashir in 2019. While the Quartet (United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE) is deeply engaged in reshaping the country’s political balance under the guise of “ending the war,” Islamists are relying on a “cold ground” strategy—based on patience, exploiting political fluidity, and awaiting a new balance of power. A moment that will not emerge by accident, but will be shaped through gradual messaging, calculated maneuvers, and perhaps, later, through the ballot box.
Wishing you well and in good health,
Monday, July 28, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com