Sudan Election Fraud Hailed as ‘Good Start’ From Egypt, France?
No Comments
Stolen votes, emblematic of a much larger illegitimate government which calls itself “democratic” was a topic of outrage among international spectators and Sudanese citizens alike on the 26th of April 2010.
It stems from evidence of vote-fixing in the nation, all to ensure current President Beshir comes to power in North Sudan. His ascension to power effectively defeats any legitimate defiance by previous leader President Omer towards the International Criminal Court’s warrant to arrest him and thus further separating Northern Sudanese political groups. Evidence of the election tampering was prolific enough to spark widespread boycotting of the elections among the vast majority of Northern Sudan. Why has this resulted in calls of endorsement let alone support from France and Egypt?
Overlooking the obvious election tampering, both countries rallied behind the idea of some sort of fledgling democracy and an owed sense of beginner’s leniency… evident behind the sole fact that there were “elections” and less by the means in which they were conducted. Simply stated: the manner in which Beshir manipulated Sudanese citizens and took advantage of good governance for his own personal gain doesn’t best reflect the UN’s mission of which both France and Egypt are actively involved, and yet the two countries are pleased by the effort? There doesn’t always have to be as silver lining, unless it becomes paramount to save face or truly believe it doesn’t bother you when autocratic dictators claim their power using the tools you (France and Egypt) equipped them with: Elections.
Teaching them how to run them and educating voters alike, then providing the means to secure them, and who could forget the multilateral Sudanese agreement for them to be held at all let alone to have elections among the North and South, (an agreement in which implied the significance of a divided Sudan)?! These tampered elections may even go so far to appear to in fact undermine efforts thus far if election results continue to be unencumbered. Everything is impressionable when you’re trying to teach democracy as a form of government and this lesson gets an “F.”
What incentive is there to bring unification in Sudan if the very elections they helped create not only brought illegitimacy to their work in good governance but to further separate the North and South with Northern boycotts? Voting citizens now are less likely to vote with their conscious and more likely to vote out of loyalty,that is if they don’t derive futility in voting at all and decline to do so altogether.
France and Egypt alike are shortsighted if they continue to think that simply having the elections are a step forward if their original intent was to unify Sudan when in fact it did the exact opposite. Though, there has been speculation to Egypt favoring its neighbors, the NIF (National Islamic Front), in its recent win in the North out of their shared interest in the Nile River. Egypt’s only neighbors which share the Nile is North Sudan, which bitterly contrasts the many countries below the two “uneasy allies” who stand to gain the most if they unite on issues surrounding the Nile. Egypt worries these neighboring countries adjacent to Southern Sudan would threaten North Sudan and Egypt’s hold on the Nile. Egypt believes it can work with the NIF, even manipulate it, what with how much leverage they have with Western influences in Sudan, according to Allafrica.com. With ulterior motives, Egypt can publically endorse elections in the North and only those, but wouldn’t publically endorse the NIF what with being invited to the table with full participation in Sudan by the UN. Its mission for peace and stability after all is exclusive from outside interests like Egypt and Nile River affairs but then again it wouldn’t exclude Egypt from trying to look out for themselves that much more with full access in Sudan now.
Northern oppositionists say they have been abandoned by foreigners whom they used to see as allies and which they had hoped might support them in their aspirations for democracy and human rights. In London on 25 April, the two big Northern parties, the National Umma Party and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), held a joint meeting, where angry speakers from the floor denounced the West’s policy on Sudan and its acceptance of the NCP’s fraudulent elections and lack of concern for democratization. The future isn’t looking too bright. People want leadership and in the absence of genuine leadership they’ll listen to whoever steps up to the microphone. They want leadership.