When on Sunday, January 9, 2011, several millions of Sudanese troopedout in droves to cast their ballots in a much-awaited referendum, theaim was to decide whether to be or not to be a part of an old order. Yes, the crux of the matter was to decide whether South Sudan would want to continue to be a part of the main Sudan or secede to form the newest country in the international community.The momentum that pushed towards secession of South Sudan from the main Sudan has its genesis in primordial factors dated back to independence in February, 1956. Before then, Britain ruled Sudan from 1899 through 1955 and administered North and South as separate entities preventing travel from one region to the other. As a result, people based in the North (home to about two-thirds of Sudans land and population) saw more development and formal education whereas the South remained largely a museum of nature.That imbalance sparked Southern fears of Northern domination when the British announced plans of leaving. Southerners took up arms against the North in August 1955, six months before independence. Thus, this country reputed to be the largest country in African was born in crisis and ever since independence, has been the scene of the longest civil war in the world.Incidentally, most jobs in the new national government did, in fact, go to Northerners. The north also dominated the process of drafting the constitution. Analysts see in many northerners a deep-rooted racism and imperial attitude and a sense of superiority toward southerners.Many northerners have a mix of Arab and black ancestry but deny the strongly African elements in their skin colour and physical features. They associate these features with the negroid race and see it as the mother race of slavery, inferior and demeaned.The insurgency that started in 1955 killed several 100,000 people and forced many more from their homes until a peace deal silenced the guns in 1972. Barely a decade later though, war resumed after the Sudanese President split the south into three regions and sought to impose Islamic law on non-Muslims.A 1989 coup detat that brought President Omar al-Bashir to power let him steer the ship of state by the compass of islamic extremism. He, for example, praised the 1979 Iranian Revolution and offered shelter to many groups the United States views as terrorist organizations. Long before he became a household name, Osama Bin Laden arrived Sudan in 1991. It was as though the cup of Sudan had run over as the US added the East African country to its list of state sponsors of terrorists two years later.The pattern of political and economic development in Sudan holds significant implications for the wider context of Africa, the Arab countries and the entire underdeveloped world. The largest country in Africa, Sudan has 80 million acres of cultivable land. Much, of this land is composed of highly fertile soil, instituted by silk washed down from Ethiopian highlands. The Blue and White Niles, converging in Khartoun, provide an ample supply of water for irrigation.With only five per cent of the arable land actually under cultivation at the time of independence, Sudan seemed set to complement its strength in cotton production with equal strength in food production. Such were the hopes at independence. 30 years later however, Sudan experienced a desperate economic crisis. Far from producing surplus for export, the agricultural sector retreated even from the goal of self-sufficiency in basic foodstuffs. Some four million of the countrys 20 million population then faced starvation.While Sudan may constitute a particularly salient case, many other underdeveloped countries have undergone a similar experience characterized by disrupted hopes and unfulfilled potential.Sudanese political life has been exceptionally rich and sophisticated. Despite the attempts of governments to limit the spontaneous vitality of political life, by imposing centrally controlled structures and ideas on the population, political consciousness has remained high. A wide variety of political movements, responding to the problems which Sudan has faced over more than half a century, have held the stage often articulating well-developed and highly coherent political ideologies.The landmark referendum, which is expected to signpost the willingness or not of the South to continue to cohabit with the North as a one and united country is a key part of the 2005 comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) which ended decades of war between the Northern government based in Khartoum and the Sudan peoples liberation Army (SPLA) based in the South. Thus, the weeklong event marks a significant chapter in the chequered history of Sudan.It can be viewed as a dangerous process started by the West and the Zionist regime. The process can be analysed in line with the efforts made by the US and other western countries to make the Islamic world smaller. The separation of South Sudan from North Sudan will definitely affect the geopolitics of the Islamic world and will create a new Israel in the heart of Sudan.Since the independence of Sudan from Egypt and the United Kingdom in 1956, Britain has always sought to separate south from the north due to the oil reserves in the South. It is established that South Sudan has about 80 per cent of the countrys oil reserves.The fact that South Sudan is located on the shores of the Nile River and the discovery of uranium, copper and magnesium reserves in the region, have encouraged Britain, the US and other Western countries to make efforts to separate the region. The Zionist regime is also playing an active role in the process because the separation of South Sudan would pave the way for an Israeli presence in the region.Prince Fafoluyi is the Principal Administration Officer, Ilaje Local Government, Ondo State.
Click here to read full news..
