We will soon not have claim on name Azania for this goegraphic piece of our 
Africa, because there new state called Azania (current South Sudan).



----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Kenneth King <nnamd...@yahoo.com>
To: globalafricanprese...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 2 January, 2010 21:30:42
Subject: [GlobalAfricanPresence] Sudan and the hereafter

  
http://weekly. ahram.org. eg/2010/979/ sc271.htm

Sudan and the hereafter

According to Gamal Nkrumah, though the scenario of a divided Sudan looms large 
over 2020, the call for unity will not be forgotten 

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -


Not long ago, Sudan was one country; today it is four -- the Caliphate of 
Khartoum, Azania or Southern Sudan, Darfur and Napata (Nubia). The Beja people 
of eastern Sudan also want to form their own independent political entity. By 
most accounts, the summer of 2020 has been blistering for all governments, 
elected or otherwise, of the Nile Valley states. 

As the international community hesitates to interfere in the domestic affairs 
of the states that once constituted Sudan, the rulers of the Nile Valley 
nations also drag their feet. There is little political incentive in changing 
the status quo. When Sudan was one country, the Sudanese had many problems. 
There were problems of freedoms or the lack of them, of democracy or the dearth 
of it.

Today, the Caliphate of Khartoum is a bastion of militant Islam in Africa. 
Islamist clerics manipulate the levers of power from behind the scenes. 
Turbaned fanatics run the economically ruined country. The once prosperous 
capital Khartoum has fallen on hard times. Per capita income is one of the 
lowest in Africa; economic growth has grounded to an abrupt halt. The ruling 
religious clique, evidently, has failed miserably to end the unconscionable 
poverty of their subjects. 

Secularist Azania, in sharp contrast, has managed to keep oil wealth in the 
resource-rich country and to improve the standards of living of the people of 
what used to be called southern Sudan.

Napata, or Nubia, is a secular nation, and only 10 per cent of the population 
describe themselves as religious. Some Nubians have reverted to the 
Christianity of their forefathers. Others, demanding that their country be 
officially renamed Kush, have abandoned monotheistic religions altogether in 
favour of the worship of the gods of ancient Egypt, in particular Amon-Re and 
Isis, even though Hathor in a recent poll is said to have a considerable 
following.

Temples dedicated to the ancient gods are being erected at lightning speed, 
much to the chagrin of the clerics of Khartoum. The hurried jumble is partly 
due to the determination by Nubians to attract foreign visitors -- tourists and 
investors. 

Azania is an officially secular state. However, Christianity and traditional 
African religions vie for supremacy among the economic and political elite of 
the new, multi-ethnic nation. As a major oil exporter, land-locked Azania is 
poised to become one of Africa's fastest growing economies with double digit 
growth rate figures. Massive irrigation schemes, including the Jongolei Canal, 
promise to make the country the breadbasket of the African continent. Many 
northern Sudanese are claiming Azanian nationality, abandoning the arid 
wastelands of the north for greener pastures in the south.

Does this matter? Of course, it does. With desertification taking its deadly 
toll on development in the north, the people of the Caliphate of Khartoum are 
hard pressed to believe in the hereafter. 

The caliph of Khartoum, a descendant of Al-Mahdi, has publicly stated that he 
has designs on Hejaz, across the Red Sea. So far, arguments over the caliph's 
bid have been strictly commercial. Khartoum is proposing exporting Nile water 
to its ideological allies in the Arabian Peninsula in exchange for oil. The 
caliph of Khartoum has also proffered some kind of union with Arabia. But 
details on this plan are worryingly vague. How he reached this position is a 
mystery many Sudanese are trying to unravel.

This may be a politically astute plan by the caliph of Khartoum in a part of 
the world lured by sirens of religious nationalism. Tribal chieftains claiming 
descent from the Prophet Mohamed hurried to pay obeisance to the caliph and 
acclaimed him as their overlord. 

How surprising, then, that there have been so few howls of disapproval from the 
virulently anti-Islamist regimes in Napata and Azania. On the other hand, 
Darfur, which is overwhelmingly Muslim, is toying with the idea of 
reunification with Khartoum. The disputed sprawling the Province of Kordofan is 
as yet undecided as to its political future. Arab tribes in Kordofan favour 
unification with Khartoum, the people of the Nuba Mountains wish to join 
Azania. 

The strategically located Darfur in the heart of the African continent; life in 
this nascent democracy is not exactly luxurious in spite of the discovery of 
oil. The country, run by the Democratic Party, an amalgamation of the old 
Justice and Equality Movement of a decade ago and democracy-oriented refugees 
fleeing from totalitarian Khartoum, is reputed to be under the spell of the 
wizened nonagenarian Al-Sheikh Hassan Al-Turabi, who fled from Khartoum in 
mysterious circumstances and sought refuge among his followers in Darfur. He 
advocates a type of Islamic democracy and has renounced his Sudanese 
citizenship. The Democrats of Darfur are determined to export their brand of 
Islam to Khartoum. Whatever the exact truth of this story, it is based on the 
most widely quoted version of this hypothesis by eminent religious scholars and 
clerics in Khartoum who wish to topple the Caliphate and institute a more 
benign Islamic system of government modelled on the
Darfur example. The real protagonist of the Darfur democratic model is none 
other than the ingenious nonagenarian. His loyal subjects speculate that their 
aged sage has lost his touch. 

Candice, the democratically elected ruler of Napata, has declared that she 
would in due course be betrothed to her commander-in- chief, Taharqa. Together, 
they have plotted to overrun Egypt and reinstate the religion of the ancients. 
Copts and Muslims strongly object to such an outrage. The Napatans, forswearing 
allegiance to the ancient gods of Egypt, are winning supporters throughout the 
Nile Valley. They argue that the credibility of the ancient gods is at stake. 
Curiously enough, Taharqa and his prospective Queen Candice claim that their 
real motive is to further the cause of democracy throughout the Nile Valley 
rather than reinstate the religion of the ancients. Against this backdrop the 
Napatans have installed Thoth, the patron of scribes, as the champion of the 
secularist Napatan model of democracy. 

Cairo is increasingly sceptical of Candice's motives. The Napatans have moved 
their capital from the sacred Gebel Barkal to Meroe, further south and a 
stone's throw away from Khartoum. The white-clad high priests of Napata believe 
that they can eventually overrun the Caliphate of Khartoum. Cairo, having to 
contend with two militant Islamist emirates in its neighbourhoods -- Gaza to 
the northeast and Khartoum to the south -- is suspected by its sister Nile 
Valley states to be somewhat priggish on the question of religion. Napata is 
regarded as a buffer state, but Cairo looks aghast at the heathen stelae 
erected by the democratically elected Napatan rulers. Failure to reach 
agreement on the reunification of the Nile Valley has poisoned the process and 
widened the ideological gap between Cairo, Khartoum and Napata.

With the Napatans insisting that their pyramids are greater and better 
proportioned than those of Giza, there is little incentive for the Egyptians to 
negotiate integration in good faith. Meanwhile, the Napatans complain about 
worrying signs of anti-democratic behaviour in Egypt, citing racist attitudes 
by the Egyptians as a major stumbling block to unification. The two 
neighbouring states are caught in a vicious cycle of mutual disenchantment. 
There are rampant rumours in Cairo that the Napatans are inciting the Nubians 
of southern Egypt to secede and that Napata is intent on annexing Lower Nubia, 
thereby infringing on Egyptian territorial integrity. Officials in Meroe, the 
Napatan capital, have denied the charges as preposterous. 

Sometimes the obvious answer to ex-Sudan is the correct one. The constituent 
states of the former Sudan may be ill, but they can be treated. Ex-Sudan may be 
dead, but it can be resurrected. The clerics of Khartoum might strongly object 
to the use of the term resurrection, but the Azanians and the Napatans will 
surely applaud such a vision from a religious perspective. So can Sudan 
actually become a reality again? When does "no" mean "yes", or "maybe"? Only 
the ex-Sudanese can answer that tricky political question accurately. Under the 
scorching Sudanese sun, the hearth black people call home, or the hereafter, 
the notion of Sudan lives on.


__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group Messages in this topic (1) 
Recent Activity:        * New Members 1 
Visit Your Group Start a New Topic 
MARKETPLACE
Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living
 
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
. 

__,_._,___


      
-- 
Sending your posting to payco@googlegroups.com

Unsubscribe by sending an email to payco-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com

You can also visit http://groups.google.com/group/payco

Visit our website at www.mayihlome.wordpress.com

Reply via email to