Sudan’s last elected leader asks UK to help rebuild democracy
WHEN Sudanese dictator Omar al-bashir was arrested by his own generals and thrown into Khartoum’s Kobar prison last month, one man knew exactly how he felt.
But Sadiq al-mahdi, Sudan’s last democratically elected prime minister, was not especially sympathetic.
“For me it was very … exhilarating,” Mr Mahdi told The Daily Telegraph.
“They’ve given me hell for 30 years. So it is quite a feeling of achievement to see that bloodthirsty regime ousted.” It is an understandable sentiment. Mr Mahdi’s second stint as prime minister ended prematurely at 2am on Oct 2 1989, when three army officers showed up at his house to arrest him.
There followed threats of court martial and torture, a stint in Kobar, and 30 years of on-off harassment and exile.
Now it is Mr Bashir sitting in Kobar prison, and Mr Mahdi is watching with interest as a pro-democratic revolution reshapes Sudanese politics.
At 83, Mr Mahdi has ruled out returning as prime minister and has handed over day-to-day leadership of his Umma National Party to others.
His great-grandfather was Muhammad Ahmad bin Abd Allah, the “Mad Mahdi”, who proclaimed himself the Islamic messiah and led a bloody uprising against British and Egyptian rule in the 1880s.
Today, Mr Mahdi also remains the leader of the Ansar, the Sufi Islamic movement his great-grandfather founded. His plans for the new Sudan is somewhat gentler than that of his ancestor, however.
“My vision is for a Sudan that provides a model for the region. A synthesis of modernity and identity,” he said in an interview in his villa in Omdurman, Sudan’s second city. What he means is a modern liberal democracy with a healthy welfare state and an Islamic identity that accounts for all Sudan’s ethnic and regional diversity, and an internationalist outlook.
This concept of Scandinavia-on-thenile is almost the direct opposite of Mr Bashir’s dictatorship, which was backed – some say run by – hardline political Islamists who imposed repressive morality laws, pushed Arabisation campaigns to repress other language groups, and used religious rhetoric to justify wars in South Sudan and Darfur.
The project would need a developed nation as a partner to help modernise Sudan’s economy and exploit its vast natural wealth. And Mr Mahdi would like Britain to do it – provided “you can get over your own problems with Brexit”.
The Oxford-educated Imam believes the former colonial power could be a natural fit. “What Kitchener did was very bloody and callous. The Battle of Omdurman was the execution of heroes,” he said, referring to the battle outside Khartoum where a modern British force – including a young officer named Winston Churchill – used modern firearms to wipe out the Mahdist army, destroying the state his great-grandfather had created.
“But after the bloodshed they established a modern state with an efficient civil service, a modern economy, and viable local government. They respected many aspects of Sudanese society,” he said. “So there is definitely a basis for a special bilateral relationship, especially with education and training.”
His is just one of a host of rival movements within the pro-democracy camp, all with different ambitions.
And while the Transitional Military Council, which took power after deposing Mr Bashir on April 11 has in principle agreed to hand over to civilians, they have insisted on maintaining control in key bodies. Many protesters suspect revanchist elements will seek to install another dictator.
More problematic is that many of the young people spearheading the revolution see old parties, including Mr Mahdi’s, as part of the moribund political establishment they want to overthrow. More than one of the demonstrators
The Telegraph spoke to in Khartoum described Mr Mahdi as a “face from the past”.
He counters: “If free elections come, the position of the Umma party would be vindicated. I bet you we would get a majority.” And whatever happens, he says, there is no going back to dictatorship.
But while Mr Mahdi has a politician’s knack for sidestepping divisive policy questions, on one matter he has a firm answer. Should Mr Bashir, the arch enemy who tormented him for 30 years and who is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide, be sent to The Hague or tried in Sudan, as many people here want?
“I think handing him over to the ICC would be simpler,” he said. “It would also be part of normalising international relations. To give him a fair trial here, we will have to reform our judicial system first. And that will take a long time.”