(Bloomberg Opinion) -- “The state shall not establish an official religion.”
It would be presumptuous to suggest that the American Bill of Rights inspired Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and rebel leader Abdel-Aziz al-Hilu. But if their invocation of the establishment clause was unintended, it was no less portentous for that. The principle of separation of faith and state is enshrined in the accord they signed in Addis Ababa last Thursday, effectively ending 30 years of Islamic rule.
The significance of this seems to have escaped the Trump administration, which has responded to the accord in the most anodyne terms. But this is, if anything, a more consequential achievement than the normalization of Sudan’s relations with Israel, which seems to have been Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s goal during his visit to Khartoum late last month. (He failed.)
A separation of religion and state has rarely been achieved in the Muslim world without violence or the will of a dictator. Indeed, both were in abundance when Islamic rule was imposed on Sudan in 1989 by the tyrant Omar al-Bashir. Like other despots before and since, he hoped religious law would legitimize his seizure of power. He claimed it would turn his poor, Muslim-majority country into “the vanguard of the Islamic world.”
If his religiosity was false, his ruthlessness was all too real: Bashir’s rule was marked by brutal attempts to suppress dissent and crush uprisings, usually among non-Arab minorities, in the western and southern regions of the country. But if anything, the imposition of Islamic law added impetus to separatist movements, culminating in the 2011 independence of South Sudan.
Bashir was toppled by a peaceful protest movement last year, allowing Sudan a fresh start. It has gone remarkably well so far. The transitional government, made up of civilian representatives and military brass, has until the summer of 2022 to make way for a real democracy.
It has announced a string of dramatic social and political reforms, dropping laws imposed by Bashir in the name of Islam. Among other things, it has abolished a law against apostasy, ended punishment by flogging, criminalized female genital mutilation — and even loosened prohibitions on the sale and consumption of alcohol.
A draft constitution drawn up for the transitional period made no reference to Sharia Law, but stopped short of formally separating religion and state. This concession was opposed by top military officials, but they were faced down by the protesters.
In the meantime, Bashir’s ouster allowed the transitional government to begin good-faith negotiations with several rebel groups. At the end of August, all but two signed a historic deal, which promises the rebels political representation and integration into the security forces, as well as greater autonomy for their restive regions.
It was one of the hold-outs that finally administered the coup de gras on Bashir’s “Islamic” Sudan. The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement - North (SPLM-N) insisted that it would only agree to peace if the government explicitly committed to a secular state — which Hamdok did in last Thursday’s accord.
The deal is done, but not quite dusted. The “final” peace deal between the transitional government and the rebels is expected to be signed early next month, giving Hamdok three weeks to persuade the final hold-out group.
Arrangements must be made for the return of millions displaced by the rebellions and government crackdowns. The regions will require massive investments to repair the damage of war and make up for decades of neglect. It is not clear where the government will find the money for all this.
Bashir faces a trial in the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide and war crimes, but there are political groups that will still oppose the separation of religion and state — and they will have at least the tacit backing of some powerful military men.
Hamdok might be able to count on the protest movement to help defend the political changes, but his other pressing problems may be harder to solve. The economy, which was moribund even before the debilitating impact of the coronavirus pandemic, now faces a new crisis: devastating floods. Sudan is $1.3 billion in arrears to the International Monetary Fund and external debt will top $55 billion this year.
There is a real risk that failure on the economic front will weaken the transitional government, and undermine its dramatic political reforms. Sudan’s need for international assistance has never been more acute, or more urgent.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Bobby Ghosh is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He writes on foreign affairs, with a special focus on the Middle East and Africa.
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.