The Face of Truth: Sudan: Who Really Governs?
Ibrahim Shqlawi
In our country today, amid the complexities of war and the intertwining of internal, regional, and international calculations, a question emerges that seems simple in its wording but is profound in its implications and consequences: Who governs Sudan?
On the surface, the answer appears straightforward: authority is embodied in official institutions, led by the Sovereignty Council, the ministers, and the General Command of the Armed Forces, which protect the country in one of the most complex stages since the outbreak of the war on April 15, 2023. However, reading the scene reveals that the issue is not about individuals but about the nature of power and the way the political equation was formed since the fall of Omar al-Bashir’s regime in 2019.
That transformation could have laid the foundation for a new social contract redefining the relationship between the state and society, but political forces failed to manage that phase in the spirit of the state and slipped into a struggle for power. Since then, a series of imbalances have weakened state institutions and paved the way for the current crisis.
The first imbalance was the replacement of politics with exclusion. Slogans of justice were raised, but in practice, the approach often turned toward defaming opponents and sidelining them instead of holding them accountable through the law. Over time, the state began to be managed by individuals rather than institutions, leading to the erosion of the principle of the rule of law, the cornerstone of any stable political system.
The second imbalance was the emptying of legitimacy of its content. Instead of appealing to the people through elections or a clear transitional schedule, reliance was placed on an open-ended revolutionary legitimacy, managed through fragile alliances and limited understandings. With the expansion of this vacuum, parallel centers of influence grew within the state, and power became distributed between official institutions and de facto forces.
Amid this confusion, the danger of multiple centers of power within the state emerged. The influence of armed groups increased in the absence of a clear political vision to restore balance between military and political institutions. As tensions rose between these components, an explosion became a matter of time, until the April 15 war revealed the weakness of the state and placed Sudan before the most dangerous test in its modern history.
However, the war was not the only battlefield; another equally dangerous battle accompanied it: the battle of political narratives. Leaks broadcast by Sky News yesterday stirred wide controversy, attributing to the National Congress Party leader Mohamed Youssef Kaber a statement suggesting that decisions within the Sudanese state are managed behind the scenes through networks linked to Islamists.
According to what was circulated, this narrative claims that the military institution is merely a facade for a deeper power within the state. Kaber, however, quickly denied these leaks entirely, considering them an attempt to craft a political narrative aimed at portraying the Sudanese state as being managed from behind the curtain.
Regardless of the truth or falsity of these allegations, what this incident reveals is the scale of the battle over interpreting power in Sudan. Leaks and rumors are not merely fleeting news; they are tools used in political and media struggles to reshape the perception of reality in the minds of public opinion.
The war was not the only battlefield. Leaks, rumors, and conflicting statements are no longer just manufactured news; they have become instruments in the struggle to interpret who holds decision-making power and who manages the state. The danger of these allegations lies in their reflection of a crisis of trust in the structure of authority.
At the same time, Sudan is exposed to increasing regional and international tensions, to the point that its crisis is often read as part of the struggle for influence in the region. This means that the question of governance in Sudan is no longer merely internal; it is also linked to the extent of foreign influence on the balance of power within the state.
Yet amid all this, the most important truth remains that Sudan’s predicament is not just a struggle over who sits at the top of power; it is a deeper crisis related to a political culture that has not yet grasped the meaning of the modern state. The state is not established through domination, nor is it managed by hidden networks, nor does it derive its legitimacy from the muzzle of a gun, but from national consensus, the rule of law, and society’s approval of its institutions.
From here, the real question is not only: Who governs Sudan today? But: How can the Sudanese state be rebuilt on the basis of legitimacy and consensus?
Getting out of this predicament requires restoring national legitimacy through a comprehensive political project that includes all components of Sudanese society and establishes a clear transitional phase based on institutions rather than informal understandings. It also requires building a broad-based national legislative council, serving as a reference for the transitional phase, setting the foundations for leadership and accountability, and protecting the state from any undue influence.
In parallel, misleading narratives must be dismantled through attentive and responsible media discourse, and the participation of youth and civil society must be strengthened so that legitimacy stems from society, not from power balances. Foreign policy must also be built on Sudan’s interests, ensuring that agreements pass through state institutions.
The war, according to #Face_of_the_Truth, revealed that Sudan did not collapse in a single moment; rather, it gradually eroded as the law weakened, exclusion widened, and narrow loyalties advanced over the idea of the nation. Therefore, restoring the state begins by transitioning from a politics of hostility to a politics of national contract, where disputes are managed within the framework of the state, and the people are the ultimate authority granting or withholding mandate.
May you remain well and safe.
Tuesday, March 17, 2026
Shglawi55@gmail.com