On December 2018, the government of Sudan increased the price of bread from one Sudanese pound to three (0.12 TL to 0.37). Little did the government know that this hike in bread prices would engender national outrage and protest which in time, would morph into a regime changing revolution. Across Sudan, ATMs would only give 500 Sudanese pounds (equivalent to 62 TL) per day, barely enough to meet daily necessities. Currency inflation rose by 70 percent. There was a hike in fuel prices, and tragic and mournful events including loss of the lives of 22 children. All of these events cumulatively added an extra spark to that emerging protest. The protest first started in the city of Atbara in north east Sudan. The protesters torched the headquarters of the ruling National Conference Party. It was declared “an act of vandalism” by the government, which then declared a curfew. The protest rapidly spread across other cities and the government responded with further and stricter curfews. The Sudanese people defied the curfew and continued to show their dissatisfaction with how the government was running the country. The government declared a state of emergency. Showing no sign of mitigation, protest swept over the whole country. The people soared up with new slogan, chanting the “Fall of the Regime”.

Looking back at the Arab spring, this same slogan was also heard in Egypt and other Arab countries. The people of Egypt overthrew Hosni Mubarak, a dictator in power for over three decades and elected their first democratic president Mohamed Morsi only to be removed by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in a coup d’état. This revolution contained huge crackdown on protesters, mass murder, farcical trials, leading to a dramatic turns of events ending with the release of Hosni Mubarak and the death of Mohamed Morsi in jail.

Revolution is not something new for the people of Sudan. It has a history of two more revolutions before. But none was deadlier than this one of 2019.

Now, in Sudan, the regime of Omar al-Bashir has fallen. When the protest began throughout Sudan, the government-led mass crackdown killed hundreds of protesters during their peaceful sit-in. So, the military thought the bloodshed was enough and deposed al-Bashir from power. Everyone was happy, delighted by a successful revolution. Congratulations to the people of Sudan kept coming from all over the world. If it was a movie or a novel, perhaps, the story would have been ended here. But in reality, the story has just started. After al-Bashar was gone from the picture, when civilian started to hope for a fresh start, the military started delaying the handover of power to civilians. Civilians began protesting again. Another crackdown on protesters began, but this time from the machine of the state that was supposed to protect civilians. The African Union (AU) and Ethiopia initiated a negotiation between civilians and the military. On July 17, 2019, a three-year transition period was agreed between both parties. There were jubilation and crowds on the streets of Khartoum. But why is bloodshed, chaos, and mass protests still ensuing in Sudan? If this continued after an arduous treaty between the military and civilian representatives this means one of the parties is discontent with the deal itself.

On 29 July, 2019, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the government’s paramilitary forces shot live ammunition at a group of child protesters leaving five school children dead. Later, nine RSF soldiers were arrested for the killing. It is not a controversial fact that those nine soldiers were just scapegoats. Those soldiers did not act independently, someone from the top should have ordered them to clear the peaceful sit-ins. Some blame the head of RSF, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo aka Hemeti. But all these crackdowns could not stop the demonstrations and peaceful sit-ins. It is time for the international community to step forward, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to help Sudan establish its democracy rather than arming and financing the anti-democratic clique. The Sudanese people don’t want the same fate the people of Egypt were forced to accept. They want freedom after decades of tyranny and oppression. They want a new morning where their voices are heard and acted upon, not one-party rule and one-man domination. The people of Sudan think that they had enough and it is time to change the system. But, how far can a crowd go during a rain of bullets and in defying those who hold the key to the trigger of a machine-gun? 

Revolution is not something new for the people of Sudan. It has a history of two more revolutions before. But none was deadlier than this one of 2019. None was more courageous and bolder as well. The youth of Sudan have shown their intrepidity and audacity in the face of indiscriminate persecution and suppression. They are still continuing their protests after several deadly attacks that claimed hundreds of civilian lives. No matter what happens, the youth will want to complete the story, the story that they themselves started last year. But still, the uncertainty that is lurking in the closet for this revolution gives rise to the question of whether Sudan is going to have a military dictator like Sisi in Egypt. Even a recent meeting with Sisi by the head of RSF, Dagalo corroborates the fact that Sudan is taking the same path that Egypt took in 2013. But the determination of the youth for democracy and the military’s obstinate cling to power are swinging the country’s future in two directions gradually making it more uncertain to know what the future holds for Sudan.

The revolutionary uprising in Sudan has recently been under attack by regional counter-revolutionary forces that aim to hijack the democratic aspirations of the Sudanese people. The bloody raid carried out by the security forces against the protestors that gathered around the army headquarters on June 3, 2019 has been the most serious attempt to put an end to the revolutionary uprising. At least 108 people were killed and hundreds more were injured during the evacuation of the square, which coincided with the last days of Ramadan.

The attack on protestors in Khartoum is very much similar to the unfortunate experience that Egyptian revolutionaries were subjected during their army’s bloody attack on Rabaa Adawiya Square on August 14, 2013. During those events, the Egyptian army led by Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, who is now the president of the country, killed over a thousand peaceful civilian protestors. As the massacre in Rabaa Square was a turning point for the revolution in Egypt, the attack on protestors in Sudan can be thought of as a similar case. With the dispersal of the square, the Sudanese Transitional Military Council aimed to end the demonstrations completely. However, it can be observed that the Council will face difficulties in reaching this objective.

Military actors in Sudan have been receiving support from various regional countries, similar to Egypt, particularly from those in the Gulf region, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

What is striking about Sudan’s revolutionary uprising is the involvement of external actors. Similar to the experience in Egypt, military actors in Sudan have been receiving support from various regional countries, particularly from those in the Gulf region, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Since the start of the Arab revolutions in 2011, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have worked hard for the failure of the revolutionary process and have been directly involved in political processes in Egypt, Yemen and Libya. Both countries also cooperated with the Transitional Military Council in order to undermine the revolutionary process in Sudan. During the last week of May, the President of the Sudanese Transitional Military Council, Abdel Fattah Burhan, met with UAE Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and Egyptian President Abdelfattah El-Sisi. The protestors strongly criticized the contacts of the Military Transition Council and stated that external intervention in the Sudanese revolution was unacceptable.

Despite support from regional countries, international actors heavily criticized the Sudanese army for its treatment of the revolutionary uprising. The violent intervention on a protest sit-in was condemned by international organizations. The General Secretary of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, released a strong statement condemning the violent attack on civilian demonstrators by the Sudanese military. The African Union announced that Sudan’s membership is temporarily frozen and called for immediate civilian rule in the country.

More, despite the violent attacks by security forces, protestors are still determined to continue their revolutionary uprising. Particularly the youth, who constitute 75% of the country’s population, continue to demand a civil and democratic government that represents the will of the people and that will work for the prosperity of the country. The revolutionaries also demand the removal of the military from politics, whom they accuse as being the main cause of instability in the country.

Despite the violent attacks by security forces, Sudanese protestors are determined to continue their revolutionary uprising. Particularly the youth, who constitute 75% of the population, demand a civil & democratic government.

As announced earlier, the revolutionary movements started fresh demonstrations following Ramadan and organized civil disobedience actions against the rule of the Transitional Military Council (TMC). Earlier this week, the Sudanese Professionals Association called on the people to engage in civil disobedience actions throughout the country. In support of revolutionary calls, people from different occupations, such as journalists, teachers, engineers, veterinarians, pilots, drivers, and pharmacists stopped working. On June 10 in Khartoum, protestors kept their shops closed, closed main roads and organized small-scale demonstrations. It has been reported that 4 people were killed and a number of opposition figures have been detained. Some protest leaders were deported by the Transitional Military Council and taken to other countries via the intelligence unit.

Protestors accuse the Sudanese Transitional Military Council for lacking legitimacy and criticize the military leadership for its unjust treatment of revolutionary protests. It can be said that with its actions, the council is pushing the country towards further instability and chaos. The fact that regional actors such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE have also been supporting the Military Council in order to hinder the revolutionary process, as was also the case in Egypt, has also been criticized. Sudanese revolutionaries refuse the establishment of a repressive regime and instead demand a democratic country.

It is therefore vital that both the military and civilian forces in Sudan come together and agree on the establishment of a democratic and civilian administration in the country in order to ensure long-lasting stability and peace. By successfully completing the revolutionary process, Sudan would be the first country in Africa to achieve democratic governance through peaceful revolutionary regime change. Otherwise, the country will continue to suffer deepening instability and be increasingly distanced from the initial goals of the revolution.

Sudan is going through a tumultuous transition period. During the holy month of Ramadan, tensions were simmering high: The Transitional Military Council (TMC) – the country’s governing body – and the Alliance for Freedom and Change – the umbrella representing the protestors – were in logger-head in their negotiations and the way forward for Sudan. Both parties couldn’t find a common ground for the nation – their positions are entrenched deep. And finally, after long negotiations, the military took a disastrous step in the wrong direction.

Monday June 3 will go down in Sudan’s history as the deadliest day in post Al-Bashir’s dictatorship and brutality. Close to 100 protestors were killed, and more than 300 injured – and the figures might continue to increase. On Monday morning the military moved into protestors sittings to break-up and disperse the crowd in-front of the ministry of defense; numerous live bullets were fired; anarchy and confusion reigned throughout Khartoum. At the end of the day, many protestors were shot dead and hospitals scrambled to cope with the injured. It was a gloomy day before the Eid celebrations.

The Sudanese Professionals’ Association (SPA), which led and spearheaded the months-long protests that brought down the regime of Omar Al-Bashir, called for more mass protests and a general civil disobedience after the Monday crackdown. Its spokesman Mohamed Yousef al-Mustafa, condemned and termed the military’s attempt to break-up the protestors’ sittings an “escalation and confrontation” that is dangerous, terming the military TMC as criminals that should have been treated like former president al-Bashir. The situation in Sudan is critical: any miscalculations or high-handedness can derail the transition process and consequentially thrust Sudan into possible anarchy, civil war or another military dictatorship.

The situation in Sudan is critical: any miscalculations or high-handedness can derail the transition process and thrust Sudan into possible anarchy, civil war or another military dictatorship.

Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the de facto head of state and the chairman of the TMC, condemned what happened on Monday in a press conference. He also criticized the Alliance for Freedom and Change for prolonging the negotiations; and asserted that they share part of the blame for what happened on Monday. In his speech he also announced that the TMC has suspended all negotiations with protesting groups, cancelled all that had been agreed on with protestors and announced a general election within nine months. He also promised that the killings and violence that occurred on Monday will be investigated. With the deadly incidents in Khartoum, the transition era in Sudan seems to have entered a new phase – one that is full of uncertainties and dangers.

Negotiations between the Transitional Military Council (TMC) and the Alliance for Freedom and Change has been going on since the military coup in April that toppled Omar al-Bashir. Protestor demands and vision for a post al-Bashir Sudan have been clear: a civilian led democratic political framework, a state governed by the rule of law and upholding individual basic human rights and liberties. However, Monday’s brutal crackdown indicates that the military and establishment aren’t ready to transfer power to a civilian government – the stakes seem to be high for both sides. And the Sudanese protestors are watching closely.

The Alliance for Freedom and Change came to the negotiating table with a clear demand: the TMC handing over power to a civilian government in the course of the transition period. Talks stagnated and at points even seemed to collapse. The perseverance and determination of protestors – even during the holy month of Ramadan – pressured the TMC: protestors would flock in high numbers to city and town centers all across the country. Finally, both sides agreed on a transitional government composed of the civilian and the military. However, the bone of contention was the composition: the military demanded to have a majority in the transitional government; the Alliance for Freedom and Change saw this as a betrayal of the peoples’ revolution and sacrifices. Talks stagnated and ultimately collapsed.

The brutal crackdown in Sudan indicates that the military and establishment aren’t ready to transfer power to a civilian government – the stakes seem to be high for both sides.

Both sides prepared and strategized as the month of Ramadan came to an end. Analysts anticipated that the real tag-of-war will come after the month of fasting. Hence, Monday’s attempt to disperse protestors could be translated as TMC’s pre-emptive move – and failed horribly. Protestors thronged Khartoum and Omdurman on Monday night. Monday’s massacre of peaceful protestors turned out to be a political hara-kiri for the TMC. Madani Abbas Madani, the leader of the Declaration of Freedom and Change, one of Sudan’s main opposition parties, rejected the TMC’s call for quick elections. Sudan seems to be entering an uncertain period politically. Moreover, lack of trust between both sides and escalations can tip the nation over the brink.

Furthermore, since coming to power, the leadership of the Transitional Military Council seemed eager to garner international and regional backing and support – empowering their political legitimacy globally. General al-Burhan visited Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE – all key regional players – in the course of the last three weeks. With regional backing from key powers, the TMC seems embolden and takes matters into its own hands. This is dangerous for Sudan at this point in transition. Sudanese and Algerians remember what happened after the so-called Arab spring revolutions; protestors will not settle with anything less than a civilian democratic government, and a Sudan on the right path on human rights and freedom.

Tones of condemnations poured on the TMC since the Monday violence on protestors. The African Union commission chairman, Moussa FakiMahamat, in a press release condemned the crackdown on protestors and called for a transparent investigation. Moments after the the crackdown on protestors, the U.S. embassy in Khartoum tweeted: “Attacks against protestors and other civilians is wrong and must stop. Responsibility falls on the TMC,” underlining the U.S. position on Sudan. In a press release Turkey also regretted the loss of lives and called for peace and stability. Crisis Group’s regional director, Rashid Abdi, called for restrain on part of the military; and posited that unprecedented escalations could hurl Sudan into unforeseen turmoil and anarchy.

Regional leaders and the international community have to pressure the Transitional Military Council in Sudan towards the reform and democracy path.

Abiy Ahmed, the reformist Ethiopian Prime minister intervened and visited Sudan on 8 June – he met both the TMC and protest leaders. Regional leaders and the international community have to pressure the TMC towards the reform and democracy path: a multilateral effort is crucial for peace and stability in Sudan. The civil disobedience called for by the protestors on Monday was massive and heeded by the general public. Geopolitical interests also seem to frustrate the transition process and the protestors call for civilian and democratic rule. The interests and wills of the Sudanese people have to be central in the transition period – and in all negotiations. Reports of the arrest of protest leaders after they met Premier Abiy Ahmed are not promising and are in bad faith for subsequent negotiations.

Sudan is at a crucial crossroad. The nation has to achieve positive ends after long protests that culminated in a partial revolution; the TMC has to midwife and complete the April revolution. A civilian government that represents the military and the whole spectrum of Sudan’s political and civic movements is paramount. Protest leaders, women and the youth have to have a place in the transition process. Sudan can only overcome this political cul-de-sac through restraint on both the TMC and protestors (who are peaceful), and the maintenance of peace and respect for human rights. Reports of bodies dumped into the Nile River by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are desolating and disheartening. May peace, justice and prosperity reign in Sudan – and the whole world.

Sudan is going through decisive and uncertain times: on Thursday April 11, 2019 the military toppled the regime of Omar Al-Bashir and installed a military council to govern the Eastern African nation; within 24 hours of the coup d’ etat, the head of the military council Ahmed Awad ibn Ouf resigned and handed power to Lt. Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan; more interestingly, the protestors – the masses who occasioned the April 11th revolution – continue to occupy public spaces demanding a civilian transitory council to govern the nation till democratic elections take place. These are indeed interesting times for Sudan as a nation.

Public protests and the brutality of security agencies have been the norm for the last four months – the first protest taking place in the small town of Atbara in late December 2018. For four months, sporadic and incessant protests have been occurring in Sudan – and they were peaceful; women and youth being at the forefront. The regime of Omar Al-Bashir came to an end after 30 years of war (with the South), massacres, unfulfilled promises and a rule with a fist hand. The country’s economy has been ailing for a long time – inflation skyrocketing. And when the protests that began in small towns like Atbara spread to Khartoum, it was apparent that the regime of Omar Al-Bashir lost all political legitimacy and public confidence.

Sudan’s history of revolutions – and power usurping military

Since gaining independence from Great Britain, Sudan had two revolutions and subsequent military take-overs that squashed any hopes of full civilian-democratic governance on both occasions. It is understandable that the protestors were not only satisfied with the toppling of Omar Al-Bashir’s regime but also rejected any form of military take-over or tutelage during the transition period. Moments after the coup d’etat against Al-Bashir, the Sudanese Professionals Association (SPA) – the largest and most efficient organizer of protests in the capital city Khartoum – called on people to ‘‘guard the revolution’’ and reject the newly announced military council.

When the protests that began in small towns like Atbara spread Khartoum, it was apparent that the regime of Omar Al-Bashir lost all political legitimacy and public confidence in Sudan.

Sudan’s first revolution is the October 1964 revolution. This revolution toppled the regime of General Ibrahim Abboud, the nation’s first “strong-man.” After gaining independence, Sudan had two challenges: a powerful military structure/class that was inherited from colonial Britain (and that was unwilling to yield power to a civilian government); and what was perceived as the ‘‘southern problem’’ – the south of the country being a Christian majority that wanted to secede compared to the Arabanized African Muslims of the north. Hence General Abboud waged a costly war against the rebels in the southern parts of Sudan.

The weak economy could not sustain the military campaigns in the south – professionals and student unions were against the war. University students held discussions on the so called ‘‘Southern problem’’ and opposed the military regime initiatives in the south. Thousands of internally displaced refugees arrived from southern Sudan into Khartoum. Anti-military regime demonstrations organized by student unions intensified and put pressure on the government. Demonstrations quickly spread to Omdurman, Juba and Port Sudan. General Abboud dissolved his military government on 26 October 1964, forming a transitory military council of which he was the chairman and retained the position as Head of State. Student demonstrations and public protests continued and intensified, and General Abboud resigned on 15 November 1964 – bringing down Sudan’s first military leader.

Sudan’s second revolution occurred in 1985 and ultimately catapulted Omar Al-Bashir to power in the 1989 military coup. The then (1985) president Jaafar Nimeiry had come to power earlier in the 1969 coup d’etat against a civilian government. The ‘‘Southern problem’’ was unsolved and the military regime had blood on its hand after numerous wars in the South throughout the 70s and early 80s. President Nimeiry sensing a dwindling political legitimacy invited Islamist political parties to his government so as to strengthen his position. In 1983, he declared Sharia as the basis of the Sudanese legal system – further alienating the Christian majority south. The secession war in the south intensified and economically burdened the military regime in Khartoum.

In 1985 discontent with the government climaxed. High inflation coupled with a rising food, transport and gasoline prices, ignited anti-government protests in Khartoum. The anti-government protests spread throughout the country as President Nimeiry was away on a state visit to the U.S. Student unions and civil societies joined the anti-government protests and the whole country was paralysed and came to a stand-still. On 6 April, 1985, the then defence minister Swar Al-Dahad ousted president Nimeiry in yet another military coup d’etat. Sudan entered an uncertain period politically as the economy continued its underperforming. A civilian government was elected headed by Ahmad Ali Al-Mirghani, which was short-lived until Omar Al-Bashir ousted it in yet another military coup d’etat on 30 June 1989.

Sudan’s Nile Spring – and lessons from the 2011 Arab Spring

The protests in Sudan began in late December 2018 and are still ongoing. Protests were based on issues that are structural in terms of governance, the economy, civil liberties and human rights issues. The demands of protestors transcended the ousting of Omar Al-Bashir. The country has deep rooted issues and failure to tackle them will be detrimental to the very existence of Sudan as a nation and as a functioning Asabiyyah – society. After 30 years of military-police rule, a civil war and a subsequent secession of the South (South Sudan voted for independence in 2011) and genocide in the western Darfur region, clearly Sudan has to ameliorate its governance system and exorcise itself of the ‘‘demons’’ of impunity and corruption. For Sudan, at this time in history, a cathartic soul searching odyssey is inevitable.

Sudan’s economic downturn accelerated after the South voted to secede. After the new nation was established as South Sudan, all the oil fields and most agriculturally productive lands were lost to Khartoum. Sudan had lost ¾ of its oil productions that translated also to 90% of its exports and 40% of its budget expenditure. Government expenditure in social services dwindled. The economy showed no signs of improving. Youth unemployment and inflation skyrocketed. Since the 2015 elections Al-Bashir reshuffled his cabinet four times. In one dramatic incident in which foreign Minister Ibrahim Ghandour was sacked, he declared in parliament questionings that his ministry run out of money in its day-to-day operations. Soon, basic goods and services became too expensive for the majority. Bread and electricity were unaffordable, and protests that took place in small villages and towns were brutally suppressed by the local security services. Then in late December the situation was unbearable and mass demonstrations commenced after the Atbara protests.

After 30 years of military-police rule, a civil war and a subsequent secession of the South and genocide in the western Darfur region, clearly Sudan has to ameliorate its governance system and exorcise itself of the ‘‘demons’’ of impunity and corruption.

The impunity and brutality of security forces throughout Al-Bashir’s 30 years reign was another issue that the masses both implicitly and explicitly disapproved of. The Darfur crisis is globally renowned. In a span of a year more than 70,000 civilians lost their lives and nearly 1.8 million people were uprooted out of their homes. On the eve of the 11 April coup, most protesters were chanting ‘‘we are all Darfur’’ in solidarity with the peoples of western Sudan. Over the years Sudan had morphed into a police state: freedom of expression in the form of criticising the regime was unimaginable. During the early stages of the protests, police and plain cloth security services shoot live bullets at protesters. Hit squads run the streets and harassed protesters. Some protestors were taken from their homes never to be seen again. A BBC forensic investigation revealed a torture chamber in Khartoum where arrested protesters were held. All what was the norm in Al-Bashir’s 30 years rule was displayed and applied to the protesters. The sheer brutality of the regime (that was supposedly reserved for the Darfurians) shocked the masses – and fuelled the protests across the country.

In nearby Algeria protesters deposed the regime of Abdullaziz Bouteflika and demanded an overhaul of the whole regime and governance system. In neighbouring Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed, a young and charismatic leader was reforming the brutal police state that Ethiopia was for a long time. All these regional developments motivated the hopes of the protesters. Furthermore, there were clear lessons from the 2011 Arap Spring: counter-revolution and old-guards would always pounce back at the gains of the revolution – as happened in Egypt with General Sisi. Regime change was not the long-term solution envisioned by the protesters – a good lesson from the Arab spring. The whole system must structurally change; this was why protesters continued their demonstrations even after Al-Bashir was toppled and General Awad Ibn Ouf took over power. They were not interested anymore in a power transfer or circulation amongst the military class.

With lessons learnt from the Arab Spring, the people of Sudan know that the whole system must structurally change; this was why protesters continued their demonstrations even after Al-Bashir was toppled and General Awad Ibn Ouf took over power. 

The uncertain road ahead for Sudan and its People

So far the protesters have the upper hand in post-Al-Bashir Sudan: they defied the curfew imposed by the military. The current military council has made some concessions, but fails to appease the protesters. Organizers and civil societies are adamant that only a civilian led transition can chart the path ahead for Sudan. All political prisoners have been released – this is a good sign from the current military council. However, protesters are still on the streets – the military council has to listen to their demands. The road ahead is uncertain and Sudan has to collectively take careful steps – a Libya or Syria scenario has to be avoided at all costs.

First, the military council has to dismantle, restructure and reform the security and intelligence apparatus that is left behind of Al-Bashir’s regime. The notorious and brutal National Intelligence and Security service (NISS) and the Rapid Support Forces (formerly the Janjaweed militia) has to be brought under a civilian administration. The military council has appointed a new leadership for these organs but this is not enough; its former heads have to face accountability for the crimes and brutalities committed over the years and during the protests. These security organs have to be reorganized and operate with new mantras – of service to the people and respecting human dignity. There days of operating as rogue militias must come to an end.

Second, the military council has to include protest organizers, civil societies, women, minorities and the youth into its transitory council. Post-Al-Bashir civic and political spaces have to be expanded and be inclusive for all segments of society – Sudan’s body-politics needs a breathing span to relieve itself and normalise. Women and youth played a crucial role in the protests all over the country. The image of Alaa Salah (symbolizing the Nubian warrior queens ‘‘Kandakat’’) captured the imagination of many protesters; she represents a living lady liberty in blood and flesh, not as a statue. Moreover, minorities on the margins of Sudanese society also have to be included into the transitory process. Today, Sudan ‘‘soul’’ and very existence is at stake, only a tapestry ruling council composed of its diversity will salvage the nation.

Finally, in terms of geopolitics, the military council has to chart for itself a clear, decisive and strategic path. Over the years the MENA regions has witnessed rapid geopolitical realignments. Sudan has to tread a balanced path. Regional and global powers see a window of opportunity in the military transition period. Direct influence and indirect impact through civil societies, political parties and even employing violent actors by different power axis will be inevitable. The military council has to up its geopolitical antenna and put first the interests of the Sudanese masses – and the protesters demands. The African Union and IGAD are also watching closely the situation in Sudan. The AU cautioned the military council on the demands of the protesters. Sudan is going through uncertain and also promising times. The horizon looks bright and pregnant with hope. The military council and Sudanese people have to be cautious, decisive and maintain peace.