The Muslim Brotherhood sparked the flames of war and continued to fuel them in Sudan
On Saturday, April 8 of last year, a week before the outbreak of fighting between the army and the “Rapid Support Forces,” political forces and tripartite mediation efforts (Saudi-American-Emirati) succeeded in bringing together the Sudanese army commander Abdul Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Forces leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemeti).
During the meeting, an agreement was reached to settle the presence of the Egyptian Air Force at the Merowe Airport airbase, which the Rapid Support Forces claimed was threatening. It was also agreed to hold a “technical” meeting the following day (Sunday) to discuss the crisis. However, at the appointed time, everyone was present except al-Burhan, who was absent due to “illness,” and he did not send any of his assistants, which Hemeti‘s circle interpreted as a disavowal of what had been previously agreed upon. Subsequently, Hemeti ordered his forces to move to an area near the airbase.
Many questioned the reasons for al-Burhan‘s “absence” from the Sunday meeting. Some said he was under pressure from army officers affiliated with the Islamic movement (the local name for the Muslim Brotherhood). Doubts increased further after hints from a group of Islamist leaders and journalists on their social media pages, particularly Facebook, suggesting that war was imminent and victory was assured. The situation became more confusing as al-Burhan was no longer available for dialogue, remained silent, and ordered alertness and mobilization within the armed forces (the army), with both sides keeping their fingers on the trigger.
On April 11 of last year, two days before the outbreak of war, activist Amar Al-Sajjad posted on his page an ambiguous message seeming to respond to an incitement, saying: “The people (the excluded), you, are these tanks coming to Khartoum to plant flowers?” Before that, Al-Sajjad had given what he called “valuable” advice, saying: “Any family that can leave Khartoum for the longest possible period should do so.” He had previously mentioned that he had “received enlightenment” about this, but he retracted it and added: “I do not know the unknown, when the world fell on me and I did not yield.”
On April 13, two days before the fighting began, “Islamic” journalist Talal Ismail wrote on his Facebook page: “The king gives to whom he wills and takes the kingdom from whom he wills,” followed by hashtags saying: “Arrest lists, travel ban, zero hour,” a week after his tweet on April 5 where he merely said “Sudan, deployment, openness.”
In another tweet, Ismail wrote: “From the leader of Khartoum, to all branches and units,” and a few hours before the fighting started, he wrote again: “Establishment of a new special force from the Sudanese army (for rapid intervention), agile in movement and with intense firepower,” prompting many citizens to question the vehicles seen in nighttime videos, including units specializing in urban warfare, counterterrorism, and special operations.
Before these revealing hints, prominent Islamist leaders had threatened war if the army continued to sign a “framework agreement” with civilian forces. An Islamist leader reportedly made this threat during a Ramadan iftar, saying they would thwart the framework agreement “at any cost.” Civil forces threatened defeat, while the Rapid Support Forces leader expressed support for the agreement as a pact and commitment. In contrast, the “Islamists” considered the agreement between the army and the Rapid Support Forces and its signing as an “end” to their ambitions of returning to power, so they used all their power and incitement tools against them.
Framework agreement text
The framework agreement signed between the army and the Rapid Support Forces, on one hand, and the civilian forces on the other, provided for the formation of a civilian government, the withdrawal of military forces from politics, the revival of the June 30 dismantling committees, and a transitional period of two and a half years followed by elections. This means a definite end to the dreams of Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood members if adhered to, and thus they worked to sabotage it by inciting the army and the Rapid Support Forces to enter into “war.”
Meanwhile, there is a great debate about who “fired the first bullet,” with the Rapid Support Forces claiming they were caught off guard by the attack on their camp at the “Al-Madina Al-Riyadiya” barracks and in Soba, south of Khartoum. The army claims that the Rapid Support Forces attacked its general command, targeting the overall commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, as well as conducting a synchronized attack on the general command headquarters, the presidential palace, the radio and television building, the military base in the Merowe area, and the Khartoum International Airport near the headquarters, among others.
However, witness “Y. B.,” a merchant working in the central market of Khartoum near the “Al-Madina Al-Riyadiya” barracks, told “The Middle East” that he arrived at his store on foot at 6 a.m. on April 15 via Africa Street, which passes near the “Al-Madina Al-Riyadiya” barracks. There, he saw Rapid Support Forces, and he saw armed forces blocking the road from the east, and a few hours later, he heard the sound of multiple gunshots and a battle between the two parties. This statement corroborates the Rapid Support Forces‘ account, which claims to have been surprised by the army’s attack on its forces but was able to defeat the attackers. In a video showing prisoners of the operation, one of them admitted that they were recruited by the Islamic Movement from various regions of Sudan.
On the other hand, despite the state of alert and tension between the parties for months, and the mobilization of each side’s forces, the army claims that the Rapid Support Forces attacked several of its sites, including the general command, and accuses the Rapid Support Forces of attempting to take power and overthrow the overall commander and attempting to eliminate him. But the Rapid Support Forces denies this, saying it “rapidly responded to the attack on it.” It is likely, according to several analysts, that both parties were prepared to fight, but neither had set “zero hour.”
“Islamists” sparked the battle
Meanwhile, analysts believe that forces outside the army, likely “Islamists,” sparked the battle with the Rapid Support Forces at Al-Madina Al-Riyadiya and in Soba, aiming to draw the army into the battle. The fact that the army did not set “zero hour” and that many commanders were surprised by the fighting is confirmed by the Rapid Support Forces‘ ability to capture many senior officers at their homes in the airport neighborhood near the army headquarters, including the army inspector general, Major General Mubarak Kamatour, the commander of the Military Intelligence Institute with the rank of colonel, and other senior officers with the rank of brigadier general who are still prisoners of the Rapid Support Forces.
It is worth noting that when the fighting broke out, the National Congress Party and its intellectual reference, the “Islamic Movement,” announced their support for the army and standing with it to defeat the Rapid Support Forces, using a well-known method by them that they have used throughout the rule of the National Congress Party’s “Islamists” to divide citizens into two groups: “traitors and agents” and “patriots.” This means that anyone who does not support the army is part of the agents and traitors who support the Rapid Support Forces, and they also see anyone who calls for an end to the war as a supporter of the militia. This is also an advertising method they have continuously used during their wars in Sudan by dividing society into two camps. And as they called, when they were fighting in southern Sudan, that war against the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement “jihad,” they considered anyone opposing that war as an infidel, so the current war is a “battle of dignity”… and therefore, anyone calling for its cessation is an agent and traitor to his country and “without dignity.”
Pretext for striking the ‘remnants’
On the other hand, the military “rapid support” propaganda emphasized that this war is between him and the Islamists, whom they labeled as “remnants”. They accused these individuals of “controlling the army” and worked on purging them from the army. He adds that his battle “is not with the army, but with the corrupt leadership executing the goals of the warlords”. In pursuit of this, the Islamists threatened, arrested some of their leaders, including the former governor of East Darfur State, Anas Omar, and Haj Adam, the head of the National Congress Party in Khartoum State, and the former leader in the ruling party, Mohamed Ali Al-Jazouli, an extremist Islamist close to “ISIS”.
In his statements during his “capture”, Anas Omar appeared wearing military uniform – with the rank of retired security brigadier – where he made confessions about his party’s role and planning for the war. He said, “A plan was made to change the government (of Dr. Abdullah) Hamdok from early on, through demonstrations and marches. We were responsible for mobilization. Coordination was with the army leadership al-Burhan, Al-Kabashi, Al-Atta, and Mirghani Idris, who set the zero hour, and we took charge of mobilization. Mobilization peaked during Ramadan… The National Congress Party decided to reject the framework agreement and overthrow it, and mobilize the masses by inciting them against the current government”.
However, the National Congress Party considered the statements of the leader Anas Omar as worthless, as they were extracted from him under duress. In a statement dated May 21st last year, the party stated that the man was forced under torture to confess his relationship with planning with the armed forces to overthrow the government, adding, “These allegations are lies and fabrications that do not deceive the intelligence of Sudanese people”, describing his appearance as a crime of kidnapping civilians.
As for Al-Jazouli, in his statements – while also under detention: “I was affiliated with (ISIS) and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi until now. Since the framework agreement was signed, we decided on a strong campaign to overthrow it, and we were in contact with the military institution and General al-Burhan through General Hassan Bala, to overthrow the framework agreement”. He was also quoted as saying that the Secretary-General of the Islamic Movement, Ali Karti, “enlightened them” that the explosion might happen on Saturday, adding, “Indeed, on Saturday, people from the army and Islamic fighters attacked the city, led by Anas Omar, and the operation is planned by Osama Abdullah and Ali Karti, and the first shot was fired in the attack on the rapid support forces and by the Islamic fighters”.
However, the political analyst Abu Zar Ali Al-Amin played down the role of the Islamic movement in the events and in igniting the war, calling it an “exaggeration”. He said that his party, the National Congress, after the revolution, was hardly present, but he attributed the responsibility to what he called the “special work group”, and that it accepted to work under the orders of the military and preferred them to the organization, meaning that it is the military who lead the Islamists and not the other way around.
The secretary, who had defected from the Islamists long ago, added: “They only move on orders and commands from the military… and the Islamic movement has hardly any influence since it lost power and the street. The one waging the war is (the special group), but it is waging it without initiative or planning, just blindly following the orders and requests of the army”. He pointed out that what he called “the most dangerous part” is represented in the defections of the special work group between the two factions of the former security chief Salah Gosh, and the former al-Bashir‘s office manager Taha Osman affiliated with “Hemeti“, and its impact on the current situation.
No peace or seriousness
It can be said that despite wide segments of the Sudanese people rejecting the war, and despite international pressures and Saudi-American mediation that led to both parties announcing more than one ceasefire or “truce”, the two parties did not commit decisively to them. The fighting continues, and according to UN reports, the continued war until now has displaced about 2.5 million people and turned them into internally displaced persons and refugees in neighboring countries.
Similarly, mediation was forced to suspend negotiations between the two parties and described them as “not serious” in stopping the war. Therefore, no one knows how long the war will continue or when it will end, as it has ignited and is not limited to Khartoum and other associated regions, but it threatens to turn into a civil war.
Summary of two conflicting readings of what happened and is happening
- Political analyst Jamil Al-Fadil says that there are more than one indicator indicating that the “Khartoum war” raging for almost 3 months, is in fact “the last battle to regain the power of the Islamist organization, which somewhat solidified after the ousting of Omar al-Bashir by the organization’s committee decision, in a cunning attempt to bow to the storm of the overwhelming popular revolution that swept the country, while the fighting organization catches its breath in preparation to reclaim its lost throne”.
Al-Fadil sees the accelerated pace of the political process as a main cause for entering into war, “it was supposed to culminate in April in the formation of governance structures leading a new transitional period, but the Islamist organization was forced to ride the difficult train, plunging the country into the fires of war to block the return of the democratic civilian government”.
According to Al-Fadil, the Islamists began mobilization and preparation for war through collective Ramadan fast-breaking events that took on a “organized campaign” character, adding, “After the disclosure of circulating prisoners’ confessions, it appears that jihadist brigades consisting of organization members fired the first bullet at the headquarters of the Rapid Support Forces at the Khartoum sports stadium, and at Al-Burhan‘s residence in Beit Al-Dayafa, where dozens of his personal guards, some of them linked to him by family ties, were eliminated”.
- Taher Sati, the journalist loyal to the army, sees that the war did not start on April 15 as some believe, but on the 13th or 12th when the militia leader – i.e., the “Rapid Support Forces” – sent his forces without the army’s knowledge. He added: “This is the beginning of the rebellion. Moving forces without the army’s knowledge is rebellion according to the army law… This is where the rebellion began, and this is where the war ignited.”
Sati explained that the “Rapid Support Forces” on April 15 moved their forces in Khartoum simultaneously with forces in Marawi, towards Beit al-Diafa, the Military Intelligence Institute, the airport, and the General Command. He added: “The first victims of this war, Republican Guard personnel, nearly 35 of them were martyred in Beit al-Diafa at Beit al-Burhan, so that the militia does not arrest the general commander of the armed forces.”
Sati accused the “Rapid Support Forces” of being the ones who “ignited the war to carry out their bloody coup… But God destined that the army would control the coup after 12 hours of the militia’s storming of all military institutions and strategic sites,” and Sati continued: “The army was not prepared, as it was the one who started the attack if it were ready, and it was with its usual strength and in a normal state of readiness. At the same time, the readiness of the militia was one hundred percent, as it was in an attacking position, which put the army in a defensive position for about a week.”
According to Sati, the army “regained the initiative shortly after and controlled the situation and repelled the attack,” and thwarted the plan to arrest or assassinate army leaders, including General al-Burhan, Lieutenant General Shams al-Din Kabashi, Lieutenant General Yasser Al-Atta, and Lieutenant General Ibrahim Jabir, “who were all targeted for assassination or arrest.”
Sati stressed that the armed forces have no interest in continuing the rebellion, and their declared goal is to end the rebellion and the coup. “The coup has destroyed the Rapid Support Forces and forced its leadership into hiding and destroyed the camps and paralyzed its movement, transforming it from a militia with power ambitions and a political agenda into carjackers, thieves, and rapists of Sudanese women.” He added: “The army does not fight a movement with political goals. Rather, those interested in continuing the war are those who loot cars, banks, and shops, and rape women. These are the ones who have an interest in continuing the war… As for the armed forces, they are keen to impose peace, security, and the state’s prestige, and they will impose it sooner or later by war or peace by eliminating this rebellion and these gangs.”
