The Sudanese umbrella opposition organisation, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), which groups all of the Sudanese political  parties and movements both North and South, met in Kampala, Uganda, in early December after many months of trying to convene such a meeting. The NDA was expected to close ranks and seriously consider the political situation now that the NIF regime had apparently broken free from years of international isolation – largely thanks to the ineptitude of the NDA as a credible opposition and the helping hand provided by Egypt and Libya. Unfortunately, judging from the public speeches of the NDA leaders and the final communiqué issued, the NDA leadership seems as far apart as ever  and enjoying it too. No effort was made in Kampala to bridge the divides and to reconsider to prevailing national, regional and international circumstances under which the NDA must operate.

It is said that politics are the art of the possible. For the NDA leadership this is something that they have yet to realise. If the NDA had considered the situation around it and then chosen to maintain its current stance then that at least would have been a decision on which its successes and failures would ultimately be judged. Regrettably, an examination of the proceedings in Kampala reveals that  such an appraisal of the national and regional circumstances was neither discussed nor evaluated.

To cite some examples: Firstly, the Libyan-Egyptian initiative on Sudan is a blatant attempt to undermine the NDA by getting its principle Northern parties, the Umma and the Democratic Unionists, to reconcile with the NIF regime in Khartoum.   If that is achieved, as seems more and more likely, the NDA will become worthless as an opposition movement. Only the SPLA would remain as a credible opposition force.

Secondly, the regional alliance, on which the NDA had relied heavily for its opposition strategy, cannot be counted upon any longer due to changing circumstances. The main trust of the NDA military strategy has been premised on support from Ethiopia and Eritrea. These two countries are now at war with each other  and each in turn has begun a rapprochement with the NIF regime. Circumstances have changed markedly since the NDA strategy was formulated five years ago.

Something which the NDA strategists have not taken into consideration is the fact that regardless of the war between them, neither Ethiopia nor Eritrea could have afforded to support the NDA  indefinitely. Both are poor countries with concerns of their own. Their initial support for the NDA was based on the calculation that the NDA would quickly deliver political changes in Khartoum. That calculation has since proved over optimistic and it is the NIF regime which is delivering policy changes for these two countries at a faster pace than the NDA could ever have aspired to. This is leading to shift in regional alliances and allegiances.

Even Uganda, which so far has proved to be a stalwart of support for the people of  Southern Sudan, must not be taken for granted. Uganda is an independent country with its  own national interest, and these will not always  coincided  with the interests of Southern Sudan. Uganda will pursue its own interests to the exclusion of those of the South if circumstances demand it. This is the way in which recent contacts between Kampala and Khartoum should be read. Times change and nothing in politics remains static for long, let alone forever.

Finally, after nearly six years of trying for peace in Sudan, it cannot be assumed that the IGAD peace process will remain in place indefinitely. Three of the four countries that comprise the IGAD peace committee on Sudan are Ethiopia, Eritrea and Uganda, and all have national interests of their own to pursue with Khartoum. Indeed they are all kinds of pressures  being brought to bear on the IGAD process to deliver peace – any kind of peace.  It would seem to be in the best interests of Southern Sudan to pursue the question of Self-determination with considerable urgency, vigour and persistence whilst all the Northern political forces are still paying lip service to the principle. Representatives of the South at the forthcoming rounds of the IGAD talks should press for the definition of the interim period so that when the time for holding the referendum comes, the choice for the Southern people between unity or separation is a credible one.
.