Face of Truth: The Government of Hope: Balancing Acts and the Challenges of Political Action
Ibrahim Shglawi
In a politically troubled context—where internal actors are at odds and national priorities clash with appeasement calculations—the “Government of Hope,” led by Dr. Kamal El-Din Idris, emerged as an attempt to chart a middle path between the possible and the available, between the imperatives of state management and a legacy of fragmentation and experimentation.
From the outset, the Prime Minister appeared to adopt a strategy of “absorbing surprises and taming the political arena,” by forming his cabinet gradually. This approach avoided alienating various factions but also failed to reveal a clearly defined project. It is a cautious approach, aimed at unraveling complexities behind closed doors before bringing them into the open, in a political environment where power is often governed by complex balances and hidden networks of influence.
Five new ministers were announced two days ago as part of the Government of Hope. While their names suggest professional competence and administrative experience, the appointments did not break from the logic of political recycling, especially regarding representation from the Juba Peace Agreement signatories. There were no qualitative surprises; instead, familiar figures resurfaced—some of whom had taken part in past transitional experiments without achieving meaningful breakthroughs.
Ministers such as Engineer Mohamed Kurtikela (Federal Governance), Dr. Jibril Ibrahim (Finance), and Dr. Abdullah Darf (Justice) are among those with varying degrees of executive capability.
Jibril, despite the political controversy surrounding him, has economic expertise and has managed the war file with a degree of shrewdness under difficult circumstances. As for Abdullah Darf, his appointment marks a pivotal moment; he is a figure who has devoted himself to defending the rule of law and restoring the principle of justice, which collapsed under the pressure of politicization and overreach. His selection carries a reformist character, free from political pandering, and places upon him the critical task of legislative reform, institutional reconstruction, and restoring public confidence in the justice system as the state’s ultimate safeguard.
In this context, the absence of women from the announced cabinet is an alarming sign. The amended 2025 Constitutional Document guarantees at least one-third representation of women in the executive branch, reflecting their political and social roles. However, the current appointments only reinstated Mahasin Yaqoub in the Ministry of Industry and Trade—despite expectations of female representation in at least three other ministries. This absence signals a weak political will to implement constitutional commitments.
Equally troubling was the absence of the collective oath-taking ceremony—a simple yet symbolically powerful constitutional ritual. In Sudan’s political imagination, this moment marks the true beginning, the transition from fragmentation to a state-building project. Its absence may be interpreted as a lack of clear vision regarding the government’s identity and purpose. Instead of launching with unified momentum, appointments have trickled in piecemeal, raising more questions than they inspire confidence. Domestically and internationally, this absence suggests institutional fragility and gives the impression of a government still in search of itself.
Under these conditions, decisive action is required—not merely to prevent the government from remaining on the defensive, but to seize the initiative. Otherwise, the opposition narrative will regain ground, and Kamal Idris may shift from “leader of a reform project” to a figure consumed by daily controversies.
An objective reading reveals that, so far, the Government of Hope has not succeeded in establishing a formula that would enable it to become a truly inclusive national project. Vision remains entangled in appeasement calculations, and performance is still driven by political distribution formulas. Nevertheless, opportunity persists. Certain figures—foremost among them the Minister of Justice—could serve as genuine pivot points for redirecting the course, provided they form the nucleus of a cohesive team rather than just names in a political ledger.
Such a transformation requires a radical shift in how state affairs are managed. What is needed now is not merely to complete a list of appointments, but to complete a national project—one that respects constitutional balance, rebuilds public trust, ensures full inclusion of women, and presents a new model of governance.
The Government of Hope must summon the political will to break free from petty calculations and adopt a vision that places competence above loyalty, and merit above political compromise—unless there are hidden considerations in dark chambers yet to be revealed when the full cabinet is announced.
According to the Face of Truth perspective, the announced ministerial formation reflects a form of cautious political pragmatism, more than a strategic will for structural transformation. The absence of a comprehensive vision and the prioritization of appeasement over foundational reform suggest a tactical crisis-management approach, rather than a holistic roadmap for state rebuilding.
Still, if this pragmatism is channeled within an institutional framework governed by law, grounded in inclusive representation and effective performance, it may yet lay the groundwork for a transitional shift. Only then will the idea of “hope” move from a slogan to a real conceptual shift in defining the role of the state—politically and socially.
At that point, the government may earn the trust and approval of the Sudanese people.
Wishing you wellness and prosperity.
Sunday, July 13, 2025
📧 Shglawi55@gmail.com