Sudan’s antiwar coalition Taqaddum has splintered due to disagreements over engagement with the RSF, leading to the formation of two factions: Taasis, which aligns with the RSF, and Somoud, which seeks to maintain neutrality. Taqaddum’s reputation plummeted after signing a controversial agreement with the RSF, exacerbating claims of complicity. Analysts suggest Somoud must engage with local communities to rebuild credibility, while challenges remain in the complex political landscape of Sudan.
On February 10, Sudan’s major antiwar coalition, Taqaddum, officially fractured due to divisions over participation in a new parallel government established by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a major combatant in Sudan’s ongoing conflict. Formed in October 2023 under former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, Taqaddum included various political parties, armed groups, and civil activists. Those siding with the RSF’s governance are now referred to as Taasis (Foundation), primarily comprising armed movements looking to assert political influence with RSF backing.
Instead, traditional political figures like Hamdok opted for a new coalition called Somoud (Resilience) to maintain their neutrality and safeguard their reputations. Analysts noted this decision aimed to avoid associating with the RSF, labeled as perpetrators of genocide by the United States for past actions related to the Darfur conflict. As Taqaddum faces legitimacy issues, Somoud members hope to distance themselves from RSF’s controversial reputation.
Initially, Taqaddum was aimed at mediating an end to the conflict arising from disagreements between the RSF and the Sudanese army, leading to severe humanitarian crises, including widespread displacement. Taqaddum’s credibility diminished significantly after it signed a Declaration of Principles (DoP) with RSF in January 2024, which was perceived as an endorsement of RSF’s actions following their violent campaigns, including atrocities in Wad Madani.
Western diplomats’ concerns were raised, suggesting that Taqaddum’s alignment with the RSF was perceived as compromising neutrality. Analysts like Hamid Khalafallah underscore that the signing of the DoP further eroded Taqaddum’s legitimacy, as Taqaddum’s politicians seemed to align too closely with RSF viewpoints, undermining their original antiwar stance.
The split might offer revitalization opportunities for Somoud, allowing it to reshape its image amidst the chaos, although it is now smaller and challenged with regaining public trust. Experts suggest Somoud must engage with local communities to ensure their actions resonate with the realities faced by Sudanese civilians, reflecting true concerns on the ground.
Somoud spokesperson Bakry Elmedni asserts that community outreach has always been core to their mission, and claims recent criticisms of Taqaddum’s alignment with RSF stem from politically motivated attacks by the army. Civilians, who often favor army control for stability, continue to report human rights abuses by both the army and RSF, complicating the political landscape in Sudan.
The fracturing of Taqaddum into Taasis and Somoud reveals deepening divisions within Sudan’s anti-war efforts amid ongoing conflict. While Somoud looks to distance itself from the RSF’s controversial actions and restore credibility, challenges remain in regaining public trust and effectively addressing humanitarian crises. Engagement with local communities will be crucial for fostering support and effectively advocating for peace.
Original Source: www.aljazeera.com
