sudan
Senior Member
- Oct 17, 2012
- 266
- 11
- 51
Statements by US officials that Washington is undesirous of overthrowing the Sudanese government are just made for diplomatic courtesy according to ABC of international relations. If Washington makes its true plan clear, that will be taken as "declaration of war" which will entail grave and far reaching consequences.
It is no use to believe the frequent statements by U.S. officials in this regard because they are not convincing of the hostile stand towards Sudan. Since politics is a dirty game, the American officials can say something and do quite the opposite.
It is true that the relationship between the countries in some cases have reached point of no return due to USs unilateral economic and political sanctions. In other cases including the fight against terrorism, US seems close to Sudan and has hailed in more than one occasion for cooperation and implementation of the the comprehensive peace agreement, 2005 that led to the secession of South Sudan following the referendum.
Tracing the chronic complications between Sudan and United States, the problem doesnt lie in USs intention to overthrow the government or not.
Its clear that Washington is seeking to see Sudan divided in small state so as to be ineffective player in the region. US knows that Sudan in rich in its natural resources and ethnic diversity, so it embarks on changing the whole government system and not only the current government.
If anti Sudan policy is stemming from Washingtons fear of the tide of Islam in Africa, it has remembered that the Islamic tide is expanding from other new players such as Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.
But if Washington is interested to see different South Sudan, it has to take practical action to resolve post secession issues by pressuring the South Sudanese leaders to honour agreements signed with Sudan last year in Addis Ababa.
No wise man could imagine or attribute the differences between Sudan and US to the Sudanese leaders because of their Islamic background. The matter is bigger than that. The growing conditions and the frequent change of bar has made normalization of ties more impossible.
The late Egyptian President Jamal Abdel Nasser was aware of this fact when he tried to laon from the World Bank to establish the High Dam. The Wold Bank run by US has imposed its imposed conditions to make it difficult for Egypt to build the dam.
When Nasser made up his mind to accept all the conditions to expose US||s real intentions, US abruptly announced that the offer was being withdrawn, because Egypts economy was too unstable for so large a scheme. There is no use of history, if we dont leran from lessons and examples.
It is no use to believe the frequent statements by U.S. officials in this regard because they are not convincing of the hostile stand towards Sudan. Since politics is a dirty game, the American officials can say something and do quite the opposite.
It is true that the relationship between the countries in some cases have reached point of no return due to USs unilateral economic and political sanctions. In other cases including the fight against terrorism, US seems close to Sudan and has hailed in more than one occasion for cooperation and implementation of the the comprehensive peace agreement, 2005 that led to the secession of South Sudan following the referendum.
Tracing the chronic complications between Sudan and United States, the problem doesnt lie in USs intention to overthrow the government or not.
Its clear that Washington is seeking to see Sudan divided in small state so as to be ineffective player in the region. US knows that Sudan in rich in its natural resources and ethnic diversity, so it embarks on changing the whole government system and not only the current government.
If anti Sudan policy is stemming from Washingtons fear of the tide of Islam in Africa, it has remembered that the Islamic tide is expanding from other new players such as Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.
But if Washington is interested to see different South Sudan, it has to take practical action to resolve post secession issues by pressuring the South Sudanese leaders to honour agreements signed with Sudan last year in Addis Ababa.
No wise man could imagine or attribute the differences between Sudan and US to the Sudanese leaders because of their Islamic background. The matter is bigger than that. The growing conditions and the frequent change of bar has made normalization of ties more impossible.
The late Egyptian President Jamal Abdel Nasser was aware of this fact when he tried to laon from the World Bank to establish the High Dam. The Wold Bank run by US has imposed its imposed conditions to make it difficult for Egypt to build the dam.
When Nasser made up his mind to accept all the conditions to expose US||s real intentions, US abruptly announced that the offer was being withdrawn, because Egypts economy was too unstable for so large a scheme. There is no use of history, if we dont leran from lessons and examples.
