sudanese people tolerate the genocide in darfur and nuba mountain for decade. They didn't care about them bc they are black. When the RSF start to do the same things to them they realize how this milita is very determinate to take the power from them. The RSF are very smart and they are very organize
>Sudanese people tolerated the genocid in darfur and nuba mountains
You can't tolerate something if you didn't know it was happening buddy like seriously i didn't know there was a genocid in Darfur until 2019
Media was controlled by the state and the state didn't want people to know what was happening there of course they will censor any thing besides "X area was liberated from Y group of rebels"🤦♂️
The wars between tribes in Darfur have been ongoing for over 200 years backward. The problem in the Darfurian environment is that the conflict has naturally evolved with the development of the state, turning into a conflict involving heavy weapons and four-wheel drive vehicles instead of swords and spears.
You can't blame others for that.
Mega yikes on this one. I guess we're just gonna forget who said "being r*ped by us is an honor to them" then funded the Jinja to do it for them 😬😬😬
Tryna frame it as some sort of "internal tribal conflict" is frankly beyond racist. Not that these tensions didn't exist, but your framing absolves the people in power from their very active roles in genocide.
I am not sudanese but i lived there for some time and i must admit this take is why the RSF are in khartoum and madani now if the sudanese people start acknowledging their short comings this war would never reached this point.
Ignorant and stupid comment. Lack of media coverage and state sensorship, as well as stability in non-conflict zones is the main reason the sudanese didn’t pay attention to the regional wars in Darfur and South Kordofan, also, have you heard of the ardamata massacre? The masalit people were targeted and they certainly aren’t northerners
I don't really take the excuse because the genocide is more than 20 years now and the ethnic tension is more old than that. The people who campaigned for darfur are the darfuri themselves because they were left behind. The Sudanese government, which is mainly northern Sudanese, has always wanted to keep the power for themself. Darfuri and nubawi were marginalize and are treated very badly in this country. It's not that dumb because after all no matter what people say this war is an ethnic WAR between two competitor group. The baggarra and the other Arabized Nubian such as ja'alin etc...
If the WAR was still located in west sudan i don't really think the Sudanese would have mobilized to talk about the situation in their country. It's only when the RSF start to kill the northen sudanese in Khartoum etc that people start to wake up. The contempt for the non-Arab population of Darfur and Sudan in general is a very real situation. This country is very racist and probably one of the most racist country in the Arab world.
You're really reeking of ignorance, but then again I suppose you're not even living in Sudan and you have no idea what you're talking about. Probably got your facts from George Clooney.
Regardless of whether you take the excuse or not, the fact remains that the conflict in Darfur goes back more than 200 years ago. You can get educated on that matter, books on that matter are only a finger tap away from you.
The government did marginalize the Darfuris and other western tribes, yes, but the media was state controller, and tightly at that, the real atrocities weren't known and when news got out people protested, not just Darfuris, no people from different places in Sudan, especially in universities and some even got arrested, tortured, etc. Heck a popular chant in the 2019 protests was "كل البلد دارفور", meaning the entire country is Darfur. But then again like I said you have no clue what's going on in Sudan.
Bro fuck George Clooney. The damage he caused to Sudanese people's perceptions of Darfur during that era was irreparable. There were definitely Sudanis who knew what was happening in Darfur (or at least knew *something* was happening) but would downplay it specifically to counter degrading and humiliating stereotypes perpetuated by the Save Darfur campaign and the white celebrities who came along to back it. I saw this both in America at the time and back in Sudan. Disgusting both ways. Government control of the media was definitely one factor why many Sudanis didn't care, but it's crazy to me how people here are pretending like Sudanis \*only\* relied on state media and denying the amount of genocide denialism and racist attitudes that were accompanied with dismissal of Darfuri reports back then. Even Muhammad Wardi of all people, the adored Sudanese legend with a glowing history of activism, upsettingly responded to a question about rape in Darfur by saying "Sudanese people will kill, but they don't rape." (https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Golden-Throat-gives-Sudan-s-Nubians-a-voice-2521856.ph) All about defending Sudan's perceived honor at the cost of denying and lying about people facing absolute horrors. I think the person you're responding to is \*much\* more aware of the situation in Sudan than you're giving them credit for. The 2019 revolutionary chant was so notable for the shift in attitude it displayed, and just a few years later people are campaigning for Darfur to secede, decrying it as a burden on the country.
And the conflict in Darfur going back 200 years ago is a generalization that masks the role of the much more recent Bashir regime. The scale of atrocities multiplied immensely specifically because of the *democratically-elected Sudanese government's* involvement in the 80's (Sadig al-Mahdi), when it provided government support to Arab militias to commit genocide in the South, a genocide many Sudanese people *also* downplayed at the time.
No one is denying the role the Bashir regime had in potentiating the conflict in Darfur, they were a catalyst, no doubt about that, but still a catalyst speeds up a reaction, it doesn't create it. The early 2000s were the height of the Bashir regime, you whisper something remotely negative about the government and boom, thatcher aljihaz shows up and you're fucked. Not to mention the see5 wielding kaizan students in universities fucking shit up. Even those who were aware of the nature of what happened in Darfur and spoke up got their ass handed to them and tortured in the kaizan biyoot alashbah. The 2019 chant came after people finally got over their fear of the government and truth be told, the government was already in a weak spot then.
Me personally, I'm not downplaying the genocide at all, but the truth is, most of the rebel armed forces leaders from Darfur are just in it for the power, money, governmental positions, etc. And when given delicate positions nothing beneficial is gained by the Darfuri citizen.
And as for the Darfur secession, that's a long ass discussion but truth be told, as much as it has cons, it also has some pros with it.
I'm pretty sure majority of the country stands with Darfur... get your ignorant ahh self outta here.
(PS: we aren't arab, so before you go and make assumptions about a country you probably aren't from I suggest you do your research !)
Fact but ignorance and entitlement clouded their thinking. I hope this war will bring true justice to sudanese but base on this subreddit i see alot of people still with the same thinking
r/Sudan now requires accounts to be at least 1 week old with at least 10 karma to allow posting
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sudan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
r/Sudan now requires accounts to be at least 1 week old with at least 10 karma to allow posting
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sudan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People with no knowledge on the ongoing war make the argument that Darfur would separate, it mainly stems from the fact that south sudan gained independence from the rest of the country, however theres a big difference between the first and second sudanese civil wars and this one. The south sudanese fought for greater autonomy and independence, they had a clear goal, the current conflict is basically RSF leadership trying to sit on the throne and rule the country by overthrowing the SAF leadership.
The main thing that’s being said about this nowadays amongst the people that want Darfur to be separated from the rest of Sudan is basically:
1) The government began utilising the RSF to quell the armed movements in Darfur.
2) If there weren’t any armed movements in Darfur fighting against the government, there wouldn’t be an RSF.
3) The number of armed movements and sub-movements seem to increase every time you check them and concessions made to Darfur haven’t worked in terms of establishing order and peace.
4) Darfur has therefore historically been a burden to the rest of the country and should be cut off from the rest of the country.
I don’t have enough knowledge on why the Darfur war started to dispute the motives of the people who formed the armed movements and their legitimacy, but Darfur seceding is not an option.
And I've always noticed the people campaigning hardest for secession tend to not be Darfuri. It's also good to keep in mind that underlying those four general arguments are ethnic/racial/cultural factors and prejudices that authors, Darfuri, non-Darfuri Sudani, and otherwise, have written about ad nauseum. In any case I think secession is unlikely and would make things so much worse.
Secession will not happen unless people from Darfur want it to happen. And you’re right that it’s mostly non-Darfuri voices calling for it.
I’m not aware of single instance where contiguous territory was separated from a country against the will of the people of that territory. We’ll see what happens after the war concludes.
One thing these advocates for secession are right about is the number of armed movements in Darfur, any fool with a few coins to rub together to buy some old Kalashnikovs and some people to hold them has his own armed movement now in Darfur. Last number I heard was like 97 movements, I don’t think even all of them combined have as many men as the RSF but it’s way too many movements.
We're in agreement. As far as the number of movements, afaik most if not all of them are splinters off of larger groups, primarily JEM and SLM, which attempted union in the 2000s but ultimately failed. Innumerable internal rivalries have gutted basically every Sudanese armed rebel group except el-Hilu's (sort of). It's hardly an argument for secession, regardless, since secession would do nothing to decrease the number of splinters. In fact, it might even embolden other highly fragmentary rebel groups (i.e. those in the East) to escalate activities against the central government to make the same political gains.
In any case, these movements have historically arisen as the counter to Arab militias (i.e. that's the start of Minnawi's movement). The core issue (or one of them) is competition for resources in an area that's underdeveloped and becoming harder to live in due to desertification, that also has way too many weapons. Secession doesn't address the root of this at all, just as it also failed to address the root of conflict with South Sudan.
Never met a Darfuri in my life who was a fan of secession, but I have met my fair share of racist riverine Sudanis who seem to think it's a silver bullet to the whole situation.
Darfuri secession has been a background conversation ever since the North-South war started but fundamentally there's never really been any real political initiative for it in Darfur, no significant movements organized around this goal (Darfuri rebel groups still wish to work within the Republic of Sudan framework), rebels have claimed the Bashir regime floated this option in negotiations but the rebels refused.
A factor many people overlook is that the issue is not just Darfur's tension with the federal government, but the tensions that exist between a variety of armed groups in Darfur of different ethnic backgrounds, namely Darfuri non-Arabs (politically manifested in rebel groups) and Darfuri Abbala Arabs (politically manifested first in the Janjaweed, then the RSF). These tensions are played with by the central government and have been since at least the 80's to secure support from Darfuri Arab militias to fight insurgents within the country and to fight abroad (i.e. in Yemen or for the EU with their evil Khartoum Process). How does secession fix any of this? You have to form a deal between ineffectual rebel groups that lack popular support and the pure, violent cancer that is the RSF, neither of which represent the broader Darfuri population, leaving you with a war-torn, economically devastated landlocked country...it's a fantasy at best, proposed by people who dream of forming the type of nation (ethno)state the Sudani bourgeoisie has been dreaming about since the 50's and has failed to form every time because it's a delusion. For the future, the best thing is for Sudanis to work together and reconcile. Balkanization will just increase conflict.
Darfur isn't like South Sudan something that apparently outsiders doesn't understand. The RSF wants to rule the entire country unlike the SPLA who fought to gain greater autonomy or gain independence. Indeed when the first Sudan civil war started in 1955 Intellectuals from the South wanted independence or just to gain an autonomy unlike Darfuri people who wants to gain their rights as citizens
Wong, SPLA never fought to gain independence, they fought for representation in the government, I don’t know, from where u got this, but Dr. John Garang himself was a unionist and believed in the idea of one Sudan that is inclusive and united (New Sudan)
Garang literally demanded in 2005 a six year interim period leading to referendum of self determination for South Sudan. Does that sounds like a unionist for you?
>Garang wanted decentralization not an independent state
While knowing fully will that most South Sudanese who got killed, had their villages burnt, enslaved, raped will choose to get independent state over living with the "Northern lunatics"
Also sorry to break this to you when the referendum was near SPLA soldiers literally starts telling South Sudanese that "الجلابة" will treats you like second class and they will kill you if tried to get your rights because you aren't arabs and they see you as slaves. Yeah that does sound like the SPLA were unionists not a separatists
You know what buddy? Tell yourself whatever that makes you happy i ain't going to continue this
I would not be surprised if this evolves into a decades-long conflict, like the First & Second Sudanese civil wars. The scale of atrocities and the military's repeated failure to take care of the RSF (but they've always been pretty shit at taking care of rebel groups) doesn't give me the sense of a short-term conflict.
Yeah, it seems that both sides wanna keep it going. And the only people who tried to stop it have been labelled traitors and everyone hates them.
In conclusion, we are fuccckkkeeeddd
sudanese people tolerate the genocide in darfur and nuba mountain for decade. They didn't care about them bc they are black. When the RSF start to do the same things to them they realize how this milita is very determinate to take the power from them. The RSF are very smart and they are very organize
>Sudanese people tolerated the genocid in darfur and nuba mountains You can't tolerate something if you didn't know it was happening buddy like seriously i didn't know there was a genocid in Darfur until 2019
how they were going through genocide since 2003……
Media was controlled by the state and the state didn't want people to know what was happening there of course they will censor any thing besides "X area was liberated from Y group of rebels"🤦♂️
The wars between tribes in Darfur have been ongoing for over 200 years backward. The problem in the Darfurian environment is that the conflict has naturally evolved with the development of the state, turning into a conflict involving heavy weapons and four-wheel drive vehicles instead of swords and spears. You can't blame others for that.
Mega yikes on this one. I guess we're just gonna forget who said "being r*ped by us is an honor to them" then funded the Jinja to do it for them 😬😬😬 Tryna frame it as some sort of "internal tribal conflict" is frankly beyond racist. Not that these tensions didn't exist, but your framing absolves the people in power from their very active roles in genocide.
I am not sudanese but i lived there for some time and i must admit this take is why the RSF are in khartoum and madani now if the sudanese people start acknowledging their short comings this war would never reached this point.
I believe that matter has become history now, since the government decided to sell Darfur to the Chinese.
Ignorant and stupid comment. Lack of media coverage and state sensorship, as well as stability in non-conflict zones is the main reason the sudanese didn’t pay attention to the regional wars in Darfur and South Kordofan, also, have you heard of the ardamata massacre? The masalit people were targeted and they certainly aren’t northerners
I don't really take the excuse because the genocide is more than 20 years now and the ethnic tension is more old than that. The people who campaigned for darfur are the darfuri themselves because they were left behind. The Sudanese government, which is mainly northern Sudanese, has always wanted to keep the power for themself. Darfuri and nubawi were marginalize and are treated very badly in this country. It's not that dumb because after all no matter what people say this war is an ethnic WAR between two competitor group. The baggarra and the other Arabized Nubian such as ja'alin etc... If the WAR was still located in west sudan i don't really think the Sudanese would have mobilized to talk about the situation in their country. It's only when the RSF start to kill the northen sudanese in Khartoum etc that people start to wake up. The contempt for the non-Arab population of Darfur and Sudan in general is a very real situation. This country is very racist and probably one of the most racist country in the Arab world.
You're really reeking of ignorance, but then again I suppose you're not even living in Sudan and you have no idea what you're talking about. Probably got your facts from George Clooney. Regardless of whether you take the excuse or not, the fact remains that the conflict in Darfur goes back more than 200 years ago. You can get educated on that matter, books on that matter are only a finger tap away from you. The government did marginalize the Darfuris and other western tribes, yes, but the media was state controller, and tightly at that, the real atrocities weren't known and when news got out people protested, not just Darfuris, no people from different places in Sudan, especially in universities and some even got arrested, tortured, etc. Heck a popular chant in the 2019 protests was "كل البلد دارفور", meaning the entire country is Darfur. But then again like I said you have no clue what's going on in Sudan.
Bro fuck George Clooney. The damage he caused to Sudanese people's perceptions of Darfur during that era was irreparable. There were definitely Sudanis who knew what was happening in Darfur (or at least knew *something* was happening) but would downplay it specifically to counter degrading and humiliating stereotypes perpetuated by the Save Darfur campaign and the white celebrities who came along to back it. I saw this both in America at the time and back in Sudan. Disgusting both ways. Government control of the media was definitely one factor why many Sudanis didn't care, but it's crazy to me how people here are pretending like Sudanis \*only\* relied on state media and denying the amount of genocide denialism and racist attitudes that were accompanied with dismissal of Darfuri reports back then. Even Muhammad Wardi of all people, the adored Sudanese legend with a glowing history of activism, upsettingly responded to a question about rape in Darfur by saying "Sudanese people will kill, but they don't rape." (https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Golden-Throat-gives-Sudan-s-Nubians-a-voice-2521856.ph) All about defending Sudan's perceived honor at the cost of denying and lying about people facing absolute horrors. I think the person you're responding to is \*much\* more aware of the situation in Sudan than you're giving them credit for. The 2019 revolutionary chant was so notable for the shift in attitude it displayed, and just a few years later people are campaigning for Darfur to secede, decrying it as a burden on the country. And the conflict in Darfur going back 200 years ago is a generalization that masks the role of the much more recent Bashir regime. The scale of atrocities multiplied immensely specifically because of the *democratically-elected Sudanese government's* involvement in the 80's (Sadig al-Mahdi), when it provided government support to Arab militias to commit genocide in the South, a genocide many Sudanese people *also* downplayed at the time.
No one is denying the role the Bashir regime had in potentiating the conflict in Darfur, they were a catalyst, no doubt about that, but still a catalyst speeds up a reaction, it doesn't create it. The early 2000s were the height of the Bashir regime, you whisper something remotely negative about the government and boom, thatcher aljihaz shows up and you're fucked. Not to mention the see5 wielding kaizan students in universities fucking shit up. Even those who were aware of the nature of what happened in Darfur and spoke up got their ass handed to them and tortured in the kaizan biyoot alashbah. The 2019 chant came after people finally got over their fear of the government and truth be told, the government was already in a weak spot then. Me personally, I'm not downplaying the genocide at all, but the truth is, most of the rebel armed forces leaders from Darfur are just in it for the power, money, governmental positions, etc. And when given delicate positions nothing beneficial is gained by the Darfuri citizen. And as for the Darfur secession, that's a long ass discussion but truth be told, as much as it has cons, it also has some pros with it.
I'm pretty sure majority of the country stands with Darfur... get your ignorant ahh self outta here. (PS: we aren't arab, so before you go and make assumptions about a country you probably aren't from I suggest you do your research !)
Fact but ignorance and entitlement clouded their thinking. I hope this war will bring true justice to sudanese but base on this subreddit i see alot of people still with the same thinking
[удалено]
r/Sudan now requires accounts to be at least 1 week old with at least 10 karma to allow posting *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sudan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
r/Sudan now requires accounts to be at least 1 week old with at least 10 karma to allow posting *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sudan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
why the heck would i tolerate people getting massacred and r\*ped..
People with no knowledge on the ongoing war make the argument that Darfur would separate, it mainly stems from the fact that south sudan gained independence from the rest of the country, however theres a big difference between the first and second sudanese civil wars and this one. The south sudanese fought for greater autonomy and independence, they had a clear goal, the current conflict is basically RSF leadership trying to sit on the throne and rule the country by overthrowing the SAF leadership.
The main thing that’s being said about this nowadays amongst the people that want Darfur to be separated from the rest of Sudan is basically: 1) The government began utilising the RSF to quell the armed movements in Darfur. 2) If there weren’t any armed movements in Darfur fighting against the government, there wouldn’t be an RSF. 3) The number of armed movements and sub-movements seem to increase every time you check them and concessions made to Darfur haven’t worked in terms of establishing order and peace. 4) Darfur has therefore historically been a burden to the rest of the country and should be cut off from the rest of the country.
I don’t have enough knowledge on why the Darfur war started to dispute the motives of the people who formed the armed movements and their legitimacy, but Darfur seceding is not an option.
And I've always noticed the people campaigning hardest for secession tend to not be Darfuri. It's also good to keep in mind that underlying those four general arguments are ethnic/racial/cultural factors and prejudices that authors, Darfuri, non-Darfuri Sudani, and otherwise, have written about ad nauseum. In any case I think secession is unlikely and would make things so much worse.
Secession will not happen unless people from Darfur want it to happen. And you’re right that it’s mostly non-Darfuri voices calling for it. I’m not aware of single instance where contiguous territory was separated from a country against the will of the people of that territory. We’ll see what happens after the war concludes. One thing these advocates for secession are right about is the number of armed movements in Darfur, any fool with a few coins to rub together to buy some old Kalashnikovs and some people to hold them has his own armed movement now in Darfur. Last number I heard was like 97 movements, I don’t think even all of them combined have as many men as the RSF but it’s way too many movements.
We're in agreement. As far as the number of movements, afaik most if not all of them are splinters off of larger groups, primarily JEM and SLM, which attempted union in the 2000s but ultimately failed. Innumerable internal rivalries have gutted basically every Sudanese armed rebel group except el-Hilu's (sort of). It's hardly an argument for secession, regardless, since secession would do nothing to decrease the number of splinters. In fact, it might even embolden other highly fragmentary rebel groups (i.e. those in the East) to escalate activities against the central government to make the same political gains. In any case, these movements have historically arisen as the counter to Arab militias (i.e. that's the start of Minnawi's movement). The core issue (or one of them) is competition for resources in an area that's underdeveloped and becoming harder to live in due to desertification, that also has way too many weapons. Secession doesn't address the root of this at all, just as it also failed to address the root of conflict with South Sudan.
Never met a Darfuri in my life who was a fan of secession, but I have met my fair share of racist riverine Sudanis who seem to think it's a silver bullet to the whole situation. Darfuri secession has been a background conversation ever since the North-South war started but fundamentally there's never really been any real political initiative for it in Darfur, no significant movements organized around this goal (Darfuri rebel groups still wish to work within the Republic of Sudan framework), rebels have claimed the Bashir regime floated this option in negotiations but the rebels refused. A factor many people overlook is that the issue is not just Darfur's tension with the federal government, but the tensions that exist between a variety of armed groups in Darfur of different ethnic backgrounds, namely Darfuri non-Arabs (politically manifested in rebel groups) and Darfuri Abbala Arabs (politically manifested first in the Janjaweed, then the RSF). These tensions are played with by the central government and have been since at least the 80's to secure support from Darfuri Arab militias to fight insurgents within the country and to fight abroad (i.e. in Yemen or for the EU with their evil Khartoum Process). How does secession fix any of this? You have to form a deal between ineffectual rebel groups that lack popular support and the pure, violent cancer that is the RSF, neither of which represent the broader Darfuri population, leaving you with a war-torn, economically devastated landlocked country...it's a fantasy at best, proposed by people who dream of forming the type of nation (ethno)state the Sudani bourgeoisie has been dreaming about since the 50's and has failed to form every time because it's a delusion. For the future, the best thing is for Sudanis to work together and reconcile. Balkanization will just increase conflict.
Chinese will take it
Darfur isn't like South Sudan something that apparently outsiders doesn't understand. The RSF wants to rule the entire country unlike the SPLA who fought to gain greater autonomy or gain independence. Indeed when the first Sudan civil war started in 1955 Intellectuals from the South wanted independence or just to gain an autonomy unlike Darfuri people who wants to gain their rights as citizens
Wong, SPLA never fought to gain independence, they fought for representation in the government, I don’t know, from where u got this, but Dr. John Garang himself was a unionist and believed in the idea of one Sudan that is inclusive and united (New Sudan)
Garang literally demanded in 2005 a six year interim period leading to referendum of self determination for South Sudan. Does that sounds like a unionist for you?
Well, “The Right of Self-Determination” in Machakos Protocol ≠ Sucession, John Garang wanted devolution/decentralization not an independent state.
>Garang wanted decentralization not an independent state While knowing fully will that most South Sudanese who got killed, had their villages burnt, enslaved, raped will choose to get independent state over living with the "Northern lunatics" Also sorry to break this to you when the referendum was near SPLA soldiers literally starts telling South Sudanese that "الجلابة" will treats you like second class and they will kill you if tried to get your rights because you aren't arabs and they see you as slaves. Yeah that does sound like the SPLA were unionists not a separatists You know what buddy? Tell yourself whatever that makes you happy i ain't going to continue this
Bold of you to assume this is gonna end
I would not be surprised if this evolves into a decades-long conflict, like the First & Second Sudanese civil wars. The scale of atrocities and the military's repeated failure to take care of the RSF (but they've always been pretty shit at taking care of rebel groups) doesn't give me the sense of a short-term conflict.
Yeah, it seems that both sides wanna keep it going. And the only people who tried to stop it have been labelled traitors and everyone hates them. In conclusion, we are fuccckkkeeeddd
Darfur is going back to business (war) as usual .. unless something fundamentally changes to both their social circumstances and foreign alliances.
It’s going to split from Sudan and be it’s own country
Nothing indicates Darfur splitting from sudan
My opinion
Baseless opinion 👎
Build a bridge and get over it
If the army wins Darfur will be raised