By Matata Mercy
It has now been known that there has been a change in guard in the political leadership of one of African countries which is found in Northern part of Africa called Sudan.
After the numerous protests that have lasted for about a month now, the Sudanese army decided to take the matter into their own hands and take charge of the country.
The Sudanese army commander who was once appointed and worked for Omar Al Bashir decided to put the Sudanese President who has been in power for about 30 years under house arrest and the army held a press conference where they announced that there would an emergency in the country for three months and then after that the army would take charge of the country for two years before presidential elections can be organised for the people of Sudan to choose their leader.
So the question that most pundits out there will be asking is whether what took place in Sudan was actually a revolution or it was just mearely a change of guard but the old regime will continue to rule the country and nothing new will most likely take place in Sudan?
This has not happened for the first time in Africa, this is most likely the third time such a scenario is taking place where the population goes on the streets and starts protesting and then the army steps into the picture to remove the ruling leader so that they can secure their place and protect themselves from ending up as victims of the population's anger.
The Sudanese generals must have realised that if they did not get rid of the incumbent leader, the population would most likely rise against them and in the end they will also follow suit.
So in order for them to secure themselves, they just needed to pretend to be on the side of the population so that the people of Sudan could easily sympathise with them.
In my own view, the people of Sudan should continue with protests until they can be able to uproot the old guard with all it's roots that have been planted in Sudan.
These are the people who have been committing atrocities in the country. The army has been the one persecuting the Sudanese people and executing the numerous killings that did take place in Sudan.
The removal of Omar al Bashir from power is not enough and they need to ensure that all those who were working under Omar al Bashir should be removed from power and then arrested including the Army generals who claim that they are providing change and are working with the people.
In my own point of view, the Sudanese people didnot actually have a revolution, it was just a change of leadership at the top. One old man was replaced by an army general and that's it.
Nothing much will come out of the change, we should not expect the conditions of the people of Sudan to change in anyway unless they do away will the old guards of the country starting with the generals that worked under Omar Al Bashir. In my own view, there was no revolution that took place in Sudan.
It has now been known that there has been a change in guard in the political leadership of one of African countries which is found in Northern part of Africa called Sudan.
After the numerous protests that have lasted for about a month now, the Sudanese army decided to take the matter into their own hands and take charge of the country.
The Sudanese army commander who was once appointed and worked for Omar Al Bashir decided to put the Sudanese President who has been in power for about 30 years under house arrest and the army held a press conference where they announced that there would an emergency in the country for three months and then after that the army would take charge of the country for two years before presidential elections can be organised for the people of Sudan to choose their leader.
So the question that most pundits out there will be asking is whether what took place in Sudan was actually a revolution or it was just mearely a change of guard but the old regime will continue to rule the country and nothing new will most likely take place in Sudan?
This has not happened for the first time in Africa, this is most likely the third time such a scenario is taking place where the population goes on the streets and starts protesting and then the army steps into the picture to remove the ruling leader so that they can secure their place and protect themselves from ending up as victims of the population's anger.
The Sudanese generals must have realised that if they did not get rid of the incumbent leader, the population would most likely rise against them and in the end they will also follow suit.
So in order for them to secure themselves, they just needed to pretend to be on the side of the population so that the people of Sudan could easily sympathise with them.
In my own view, the people of Sudan should continue with protests until they can be able to uproot the old guard with all it's roots that have been planted in Sudan.
These are the people who have been committing atrocities in the country. The army has been the one persecuting the Sudanese people and executing the numerous killings that did take place in Sudan.
The removal of Omar al Bashir from power is not enough and they need to ensure that all those who were working under Omar al Bashir should be removed from power and then arrested including the Army generals who claim that they are providing change and are working with the people.
In my own point of view, the Sudanese people didnot actually have a revolution, it was just a change of leadership at the top. One old man was replaced by an army general and that's it.
Nothing much will come out of the change, we should not expect the conditions of the people of Sudan to change in anyway unless they do away will the old guards of the country starting with the generals that worked under Omar Al Bashir. In my own view, there was no revolution that took place in Sudan.
Comments
Post a Comment