Sudan's beleaguered president must stare down both the international community and his domestic foes in the coming election, reports Asmaa El-Husseini from Khartoum As expected, the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) has selected President Omar Al-Bashir as its candidate for the presidential elections due in April 2010. Al-Bashir faces an arrest warrant issued in March 2009 by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Darfur. The Sudanese government has so far refused to acknowledge the warrant. Any hope that the NCP would ditch Al-Bashir for the sake of national unity is now over. Since the warrant was issued, the incumbent president's party seems to have rallied around him. Many NCP leaders see the warrant not just as a personal and collective affront, but as a threat to their future. Al-Bashir has been in power since he led a successful coup in 1989. Before Al-Bashir was charged with war crimes, the same charges were levelled on Ahmed Harun, the former governor of South Kordovan. The insistence with which the international community seems intent on prosecuting top Sudanese officials has brought the Sudanese political elite together. Even potential reformers are keeping their views to themselves these days. For a while, a compromise solution seemed possible. Sudanese officials spoke of a deal by which Al-Bashir wouldn't run for president, in return for a stay of the arrest warrant. According to Article 16 of the Rome Charter, which established the ICC, arrest warrants can be postponed under certain circumstances. As it turned out, the US, France, and Britain didn't like the idea. When the ICC ruling was issued, many expected the NCP to replace Al-Bashir, but this wasn't to be. In fact, Al-Bashir used the ruling to consolidate his hold on power. Recently, he removed some of his critics from power, including Salah Kosh, the head of national security and intelligence. The NCP's defiance may entice the international community to put more pressure on Sudan. At present, the ICC prosecutor is contemplating another charge against Al-Bashir, that of genocide. The ICC previously discarded this charge, but things may change at any time. In order to secure a smooth transition in the South following the upcoming referendum, the international community may reduce its pressure on the Sudanese government, at least for a while. Much depends on Al-Bashir's next move. He can play tough, or he can make reconciliatory gestures towards his domestic critics. In his recent remarks, both at an NCP meeting and a parliamentary session, he called on Sudanese parties to cooperate more and renounce violence. He also promised to form a human rights committee, provide a suitable climate for elections, safeguard the peace agreement with the South, and help the southerners overcome tribal violence. Al-Bashir also pledged to defuse the Darfur crisis. His remarks reflect the critical situation in Sudan and the unspeakable implications of the spiralling violence. In their recent Juba conference, Sudanese opposition parties said they wanted a transparent dialogue, without the government dictating the agenda or the participants. In a way, this gives the NCP a chance to keep the country together. One of the issues the NCP needs to discuss with other parties is the situation in the South, now preparing for a self- determination referendum. With calls for secession mounting in the south and the north, something needs to be done. And as violence spreads in the South, many southerners blame the NCP for triggering the fighting. Many fear that the battles may ignite further hostilities in other parts of the country. Something needs to be done about Darfur, about the economy, and about the process of establishing democracy. In their recent meeting in Juba, Sudan's opposition parties voiced many grievances about the upcoming referendum and the laws that restrict political freedom. Unless the government does something about these issues by 30 November, the opposition parties say they will boycott the elections. NCP leaders have exchanged harsh words with the opposition and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement over the decisions of the Juba conference. For now, the opposition parties want the government to apologise for its previous mistakes in Darfur and the south. And they want the voting in the upcoming referendum to be held by simple majority, or 50 per cent plus one, whereas the NCP prefers a 75 per cent vote. Participants in the Juba conference oppose the holding of elections before a peace deal is made in Darfur. But NCP officials maintain that elections can be held prior to a peace deal, since the fighting in the region is mostly over. The NCP wants to use the elections to gain a new mandate in its dealings with the international community. Still, it may consent to some of the opposition demands. Should it do so, the opposition parties may field a common candidate and try to defeat Al-Bashir. Or, the government may decide to ignore the Juba resolutions altogether, calling the opposition's bluff. The manner of its response may decide the future of the country.
