Darfur Between the Fires of War and the Dangers of Secession
A Conspiracy Unraveling
News:
The governor of the Darfur region, Minni Arko Minawi, stated: "If the so-called founding government continues for a year or two, Darfur will become a de facto state among states, and United Nations organizations will raise their flags in Darfur's airports and crossings to prevent aerial bombardment."
In a related context, while addressing a gathering that included leaders of native administration, representatives of political forces, and Darfur region associations in Port Sudan last Friday, he said that what is currently happening on the ground is an actual implementation of a plan aimed at dividing Sudan, describing it as a "conspiracy that will not succeed" because the Sudanese people, as he put it, will stand in its face and thwart it by adhering to the unity of the country and resisting any projects that threaten the entity of the Sudanese state. (Al Jazeera Sudan, 8/3/2025)
Comment:
Suddenly, the media in Sudan began discussing the plan to separate Darfur, as if the matter had fallen from the sky, or emerged from the depths of the earth, or was brought by the wind from a distant place, suddenly becoming the talk of gatherings!
Was this emergence sudden? Or was it something plotted at night?
The separation of a part of any country is not a trivial or easy matter, but rather a dangerous one that must be dealt with as a matter of life and death, as Sultan Abdul Hamid, may God have mercy on him, said: "That the scalpel be used on my body while I am alive is easier for me than to sign a concession that gives away a single inch of the land of Palestine."
During the American South's rebellion, America took strict measures, launching a relentless war that resulted in more than six hundred thousand deaths, all to prevent secession.
Similarly, Britain, Spain, and Russia took a firm stance against secession, and this is the correct position that should be taken by all countries that respect themselves and their people.
Since secession is so dangerous, striving for it requires the availability of key elements, including:
1- Creating a grievance issue around which one or more regions rally.
2- The presence of agents inside, willing to play this dirty role, and behind them a crowd of ignorant people who are driven to implement the plan without awareness.
3- The external element that manages the entire operation; medially, militarily, and politically, and harnesses the functional regional states to serve this project until it is fully implemented.
This has happened repeatedly in ancient and modern history:
The Balkan countries were separated from the Ottoman Caliphate, followed by the Arab countries, with direct support from European countries, especially Britain, which was a red light for the collapse of the Caliphate.
The Baltic countries were separated from the Soviet Union, which was a prelude to its collapse with American planning and European assistance.
What happened in Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Sudan is not far off. Omar al-Bashir admitted that America was behind the separation of the South, and the strange thing is that he himself implemented that plan! This is what is being prepared for today in Darfur.
If secession leads to weakening the state, and perhaps to its fragmentation and complete destruction, which is absolutely rejected, then working on it is done with a preparatory stage, so that it is not revealed and met with rejection. This is what is happening today in Sudan.
We note that the idea of the margin, which evolved into the six-and-fifty states, the Nile Strip State, and the so-called Jalaba State, was the intellectual axis around which the Rapid Support Forces and their supporters revolved.
As for the external element, America has emerged from the first moment of the war as its main sponsor, declaring that a political solution through negotiation is the only way, mobilizing regional countries, and still holding all the threads of the game, holding conferences, or canceling them whenever it wants, and determining the parties, the agenda, the place, and the time.
On the internal stage, the Rapid Support Forces were carefully prepared financially, militarily, in training, and in arming, until they reached Khartoum, and were positioned in the joints of the state, to become a parallel army that holds the state by the scruff of its neck, instead of supporting it. All of this was done under the hearing and sight, but rather with the support of the army leadership, despite intelligence warnings, and despite the objection of high-ranking officers within the military establishment, who ended up being referred to retirement!
When the moment of truth came, and the Rapid Support Forces failed to seize power, the plan moved to phase "B", which is the separation of Darfur.
A war has raged, in which tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, have been killed, the country's infrastructure has been destroyed, millions have been displaced, and the Rapid Support Forces' control has expanded to neighboring states, where they have practiced the most heinous forms of oppression against the population. This is the case now in Kordofan, despite the presence of large armies in Al-Abyad, where people in its north and west are subjected to the most heinous brutal crimes. This was preceded by the army's withdrawal from four capitals in the states of Darfur in its favor, without any significant resistance.
In conclusion: This war has been managed in a way that has created a deep rift and growing hostility between the people of the country, and this was a deliberate goal and a major stop on the road to secession. Then came the founding government to be a stronger indication that we are approaching the final station.
In light of this reality, it is understood that the escalating talk about the separation of Darfur is a way of preparing public opinion for this criminal act that threatens the unity of the country and perhaps its existence. Here, responsibility becomes collective, and no one is excluded from it. Let each of us see that the country is not brought down by him.
The unity of the Islamic nation is an obligation, as the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever comes to you while you are united under one leader, seeking to break your unity or divide your community, kill him," and in another hadith: "If allegiance is pledged to two caliphs, kill the latter of the two." So how about if the matter is to break up the fragmented and divide the divided?!
Written for the Media Office of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Engineer Hasaballah Al-Nour - Sudan Province
