Sudanese police fire tear gas to disperse protesters in Khartoum

Protesters in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, tried to reach the southern gate of the presidential palace, but the police fired tear gas canisters at them.

On Tuesday, Sudanese police forces fired tear gas canisters to disperse thousands of protesters in front of the presidential palace in the capital, Khartoum.

The demonstrators, according to eyewitnesses, tried to reach the southern gate of the presidential palace, but the police fired tear gas canisters at them.

The protesters, who carried national flags, chanted slogans denouncing the "military coup" and the political agreement signed between the President of the Sovereign Council, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, and Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok.

Thousands of demonstrators also went out in the cities of Atbara (north), Kassala and Port Sudan (east) and Madani and Managil (central) on Tuesday, rejecting the Burhan and Hamdok agreement.

On November 21, Al-Burhan signed an agreement with Hamdok, which included 14 items, including: the release of political detainees, Hamdok's return to his position about a month after his dismissal, the formation of a government of competencies (without party affiliation), and the two parties pledged to work together to complete the democratic path.

The agreement, which was rejected by several Sudanese political forces, came in light of a severe political crisis that the country has been witnessing since last October 25, when Al-Burhan declared a state of emergency, dissolved the Sovereignty Council and the transitional ministers, and dismissed the governors, after the arrest of party leaders, ministers and officials, which sparked a rejection of political forces. And popular protests consider what happened a "military coup".

Ethiopia From a dream of building an empire to just warring nationalities

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's announcement of going to war and his leadership of military operations, with the increasing pace of the war on eight separate fronts, not only means the failure of mediation efforts, but also confirms that the war has become an "existential threat" to both parties with the impossibility of joint political coexistence.

And that military means are the only option to resolve the battle, no matter the cost, because the goal is not just to seize power and a military victory, but the growing feeling of the two sides of the necessity of “eradication,” which led to accusations of genocide or ethnic cleansing with the rise of hate speech and each party promising to bury the other in dirt forever.

Accordingly, this conflict goes beyond the mere war between the two projects of the "central state" led by Prime Minister Abi Ahmed and the ruling Prosperity Party, and the restoration of the "ethnic federalism" project that was linked to the name of the historical leader and former Prime Minister Melis Zenawi. The conflict goes beyond these two projects to a fierce war between the nationalities over the right of the ethnicities to rule and the monopoly of the levers of power to inherit the modern Ethiopian state.

The control of the Tigray Liberation Forces and their ally, the Oromo forces, on some major cities such as Disi and Kumblisha and their advance towards the capital through the Oromo and Afar region, and the attempt to cut off the main road linking Djibouti and the port with the capital, Addis Ababa, confirms that the guerrilla tactics, doctrine and combat experience of the Tigrayans have achieved military successes and victories in brief time. On the other hand, the federal forces launched a counterattack to stop this progress and took strict security measures after declaring a state of emergency and led effective campaigns to mobilize young people to the battlefields, which slowed the progress of Tigray forces towards the capital, Addis Ababa, which is still about 220 kilometers away.

This led to a temporary balance in the balance of military power, after the federal forces used drone technologies to launch attacks on the gathering places of Tigray forces and the city of Mekli, the capital of the region.

Military supremacy in terms of equipment and equipment is skewed to the federal government forces, but in turn, the balance of combat doctrine, military experience, and guerrilla tactics is tipped to the Tigray forces. The Tigrayan forces, through a network of activists and ambassadors, succeeded in controlling the diplomatic space and the international media, which the government accuses of fueling the war and falsifying facts. It also accused Western countries, especially the United States, of siding with the Tigrayan Liberation Forces, which Washington denied.

Although the Human Rights Council holds all parties responsible for grave human rights violations, the Ethiopian government and the Eritrean army bear the largest share. Especially with the closure of the humanitarian aid corridors, which has led to the deterioration of the humanitarian situation, and the existence of a near-famine that threatens more than a million citizens with the continued flow of refugees and displaced persons. Russia and China have prevented strong condemnations from the Security Council despite repeated attempts by the United States and European countries.

The United States is reluctant to impose direct sanctions on the political leadership or the Ethiopian army, despite its constant threat to activate the executive order issued by President Biden, and there is no doubt that Washington’s announcement to impose sanctions on the leaders of the Eritrean army and intelligence, as well as on the ruling party in Asmara, was intended to intimidate Ethiopia as well as Initiating the procedures for removing its name from the list of countries that enjoy detailed trade privileges with the US market in accordance with the Act on the Promotion of Growth and Opportunity in Africa (AGOA).

Washington's main concern is that it still hopes that Abiy Ahmed will respond to the options for a peaceful negotiated solution, so as not to lean toward Russia and China in light of the return of strategic competition between Washington and Beijing, especially in Africa, which has become one of the pillars of foreign policy and national security during the era of President Biden.

However, all these measures and the continued international pressure did not compel Addis Ababa to give up. These pressures increased with the African tour of US Secretary of State Blinken from 15 to 20 November, which included the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, where he discussed with Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta the developments in Ethiopia following Kenyatta’s visit to Addis Ababa one day before the visit.

The failure of diplomatic efforts confirms the limited impact of diplomatic pressures to stop the war, despite the repeated assertion by the US administration that the military option is not a solution, and an immediate ceasefire and engagement in direct negotiations without preconditions is required. According to the US envoy to the Horn of Africa, Feltman, the demands of the two sides can establish a good basis for negotiation and give precedence to a peaceful solution. The Tigray Liberation Front requires the immediate lifting of the siege imposed on the territory, the restoration of services, the opening of humanitarian relief corridors, and the exit of Eritrean forces. On the other hand, the government demands recognition of its legitimacy, the return of the Tigray Liberation Forces to the region, and their immediate withdrawal from the Oromo and Afar regions. But the crisis, as described by the US administration, is that each party thinks that its goals can be achieved through military force, not political negotiation.

In the face of this political hardening and the failure of regional and international mediation efforts, several scenarios emerge: the most obvious of which is the victory of one of the parties militarily, which means the continuation of chaos and civil war, especially if the Tigrayan and Oromo forces succeed in reaching the capital, Addis Ababa, without a comprehensive political agreement. As for Abi Ahmed's victory in this war, it means the actual elimination of the Tigray minority, which opens the door to accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Some analysts prefer the internal coup scenario, i.e. the removal of Abi Ahmed by the Amhara nationalists who control the army and the intelligence services, but the danger of this scenario is the expected deep and violent division with the Oromo nationalism, some of whose leaders are still languishing in prisons.

The third scenario: The situation remains as it is with the continuation of the war and the expansion of human rights violations, and the spread of famine, which leads to the gradual erosion of the state's authority with the expansion of the war to include other regions. This will lead to regional chaos, the activity of terrorist movements, the spread of weapons, and the flow of displaced people and refugees, threatening the stability of the Horn of Africa and the continuation of the collapse of regimes according to the domino theory, especially in Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia and Sudan. Washington has threatened to intervene militarily if the scenario of chaos in the region becomes more likely.

The best option for the international community is to reach a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities according to agreed security arrangements, and then to reach a comprehensive political agreement between all parties. Despite Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's rejection and resistance to this scenario, because of his conviction of his ability to win the war, it is the only way out against chaos and the collapse of the Ethiopian state.

There is no doubt that the option of negotiation and political settlement, despite its attractiveness, is not without a high political cost, because the expected outcomes will require the expansion of the “ethnic federation” project into a loose “confederation” that gives the regions completely independent powers. Unlimited defense, foreign relations, economy, education, cultural and linguistic independence, which threatens Ethiopia's survival as a unified national entity once again.

Whatever the most likely scenario, according to the current data, the dynamics of the internal conflict and the role of the international community, Ethiopia will not reproduce its previous political experience, but there will be another Ethiopia completely different from its modern history since the era of Menelik and Haile Selassie, and Abi Ahmed’s dream of re-establishing the empire and the central state will end into scattered regions that are proud of their identity Ethnicity and geography are more than a pan-Ethiopian national identity. However, he still has a last chance to favor the option of a political settlement through peaceful negotiation, rather than succumbing to the path of war that will dismantle the state and spread chaos in the region.(Khaled Moussa Dafallah)