A Research Paper On Sudan Crackdown, Its Causes, Effects, And Possible Solutions

Abstract

This research paper will touch upon Sudanese crackdown. The paper will aim at analyzing the current situation happening in the country, consequences which led to this crackdown, and lastly, possible solutions to resolve the situation. In order to find the best solutions, this research will look at the situation through Rawlsian philosophy. The issue will be analyzed through famous Rawlsian philosophical frameworks such as 'The Veil of Ignorance,' and 'Political Liberalism.'

Introduction

Sudan is a country in North-East Africa with a total area of 1,886,068 square kilometers and an estimated population of 39 million people. Sudan is a country known for its severe human right violation issues. For almost 30 years Sudan was ruled by President Omar Al-Bashir. In the mid-December 2018, the government tried to prevent economic crackdown which was caused by US sanctions and loss in oil revenue by imposing emergency austerity measures and a sharp currency devaluation. Cut of bread and oil aid provoke demonstrations firstly in the east, however, later the anger of the civilians spread around and reached the capital of the country. Since then the protests have taken places in towns and cities across Sudan. The protests and demonstrations were organized by the Sudanese Professionals Association (SPA), a collaboration of doctors, health workers, and lawyers. The main objective of protesting people was the matter of the price increase and a call for the president of the country to step down.

Current Situation in Sudan

In April 2019 Sudanese protestors could overthrow the President Omar Al-Bashir eventually. Civilians wanted not only to overthrow the president of the country but also to uproot the strong network of security and military interests behind their president. People thought that it will be possible once they overthrow their current leader. However, right after the current government stepped down it was immediately replaced by the military council. People did not like the current course of events and started negotiating with the transitional military government to end the military rule. However, it was obvious that the military is not intending to give up their power and after the long protest and demonstrations, they finally ran out of the patients. On 3rd of June 2019, the massacre began. A parliamentary group of the Rapid Support Forces headed to main protest areas and opened fire. The troops burned the protestors and beat whoever they could not kill. They blockaded the roads to the hospitals, so people could not get any medical support. Bodies of the executed people were thrown to the river Neil. Also, there were reports on child and women rape and pillage. Sudan is plunged into communications blackout, so there is no any information that goes outside the country. The body count continues to rise. There are a lot of people missing and hundreds of people injured.

The Veil of Ignorance

Rawls describes his view in the opening pages of A Theory of Justice:

Then, although society is a cooperative venture for mutual advantage, it is typically marked by a conflict as well as by an identity of interests. There is an identity of interests since social cooperation makes possible a better life for all than any would have if each were to live solely by his own efforts. There is a conflict of interests since persons are not indifferent as to how the greater benefits produced by their collaboration are distributed, for in order to pursue their ends they each prefer a larger to a lesser share. A set of principles is required for choosing among the various social arrangements which determine this division of advantages and for underwriting an agreement on the proper distributive shares. These principles are the principles of social justice: they provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society and they define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation.

The problem described by Rawls in his book 'A Theory of Justice' is a very common problem in every human society. Despite people's knowledge that they will be better off by cooperating with each other, people would still prefer not to do so. They prefer not to do so because they know that they place themselves under the great risk by cooperating with each other. For example, two villages might benefit more and become stronger by allying with each other, however, they also place themselves under the great risk by letting their guards down, because there is a chance of one ally taking over another. Therefore, Rawls suggests that people should negotiate from behind 'the veil of ignorance' in order to create better cooperation and come to an agreement which will be beneficial for every party participating in the negotiation. Philosopher talks about negotiating the 'contract of the state' as an example. Rawls claims that people while trying to come to an agreement of conditions and terms of the state experience difficulties because of the biases of their current positions and status. It happens because some of them think that they might be better off under the current system and therefore favor the current terms and conditions of the state. Others, in contrast, might not be better off under the current course of events and want to change it. Therefore, in order to come to a better conclusion, Rawls suggests that people should get rid of all their biases. He recommends doing it by imagining the negotiation from behind the 'veil of ignorance'. The veil hides our current predicament from us, therefore, makes us uncertain in where we will end up upon the agreement of the contract. After the new contract is set, we might end up in a better state or position, but also, we might not.

So, as for Sudanese crackdown in order to come to a better conclusion and finally declare peace in the country civilians and the current military government should negotiate from behind “the veil of ignorance”. If civilians are protesting about the current regime it means they are not happy about it. Even though the current military government might be better off with the current regime and their position in it in order to come to a better conclusion they might get rid of their biases. The transitional military government might be better off in the short run, however, in order to build a strong and functioning country they need to cooperate with civilians. It is possible only if the current government representatives hide their current predicaments from themselves and will not think about where they will end up upon the agreement of the contract. In return, civilians should also get rid of their biases thinking that if civilians get the power, they will be better off. Both the current government and the civilians should aim at reaching an agreement which will lead to the best outcome possible for both negotiating parties.

Political Liberalism

In his collection of essays called 'Political Liberalism,' Rawls suggested a form of liberalism which aims at building a pluralistic society that does not contradict any religions or ideologies which are existent in the country. Under Rawlsian liberalism, every religion and every ideology have a right to exist in a pluralistic society, where there is a consensus in fundamental values and in case of clash of interests between followers of different religious and cultural groups the problem can be solved through the discussion within the boundary of the law. Also, the author suggests that a state should establish a neutral system of law under which all the individuals could pursue their own understanding of the right and the good. The philosopher claims that the coexistence of different conceptions of right and good are possible meaning that there is no need for a minority to change their perceptions, however, the agreement of these groups in certain principles is important for maintaining peace and justice. So, according to Rawls, the state should be neutral, therefore, it should treat every individual equally and not be biased towards one's conception of the good over another.

Implementing Rawls' liberalism and trying to build a pluralistic society in Sudan could help to prevent violence and civil war in the country. Sudan is a country with different ethnic and religious groups; therefore, it is important to build a neutral state which will treat every individual equally. A state which will make the coexistence of both ideologies one of the civilians' and another one of the current military government possible. Making a neutral system of law which will not be biased towards one group because of its power and position but aim at protecting individuals pursuing their own understanding of good and right. Rawls’ ideology might sound utopian; however, it is the best way to build a just and human-oriented society which could help people in Sudan come to an agreement and prevent people from dying for their ideologies.

Conclusion

There were a few factors causing Sudanese crackdown such as economic and political. The civilians thought that they will be able to change the course of events by overthrowing the current government, however, it did not turn out the way they were planning. Instead of uprooting the strong network of security and military interests behind their president they strengthened it more. By trying to negotiate their rights and their ideologies to the current government civilians endangered innocent lives of their families, friends and etc. A lot of people died and hundreds of them were injured for protecting their perceptions of what is right and what is good. Sudanese remain locked up in the country without any food and medical support. The government shows no mercy to civilians and keeps killing innocent people. The only way for Sudan to overcome this crackdown is to bring both parties together to negotiate the terms and conditions of the state which will favor both the current government and civilians. However, it is not as easy as it seems because the government is in favor of current events and is better off under current laws and conditions. Also, even though the implementation of Rawls' liberalism might appear to be a very utopian suggestion, but Sudan should aim at building a pluralistic society where every culture, religion, and doctrine can coexist together. There should be a neutral law which will treat everyone equally and aim at protecting every existing ideology in the country. Under Rawlsian liberalism, Sudan will be able to build a just and human-oriented society where the clash of interests between followers of different ideologies could be resolved through peaceful discussions and not by killing and abusing innocent people. Sudanese government and civilians should cooperate with each other in order to build a strong and functioning government.