University of Oran Es-Senia Faculty of Letters, Languages and Art Department of Anglo-Saxon Languages Section of English

University of Oran Es-Senia Faculty of Letters, Languages and Art Department of Anglo-Saxon Languages Section of English Magister Thesis in African Civilization The Sudan Crisis: The Case of North- South Political Conflict {1956-1989} Presented by: Mrs. Sara SAHLI Members of the jury: Soutenue le 05 Fevrier 2015 President: Dr. Leila MOULFI University of Oran Supervisor: Dr. Belkacem BELMEKKI University of Oran Examiner: Dr. Louafia BOUKRERIS University of Oran Examiner: Dr. Abdelkader BENHATTAB University of Oran 2014-2015

Acknowledgment My journey through this Magister thesis would not have been possible without the generous support and assistance of others. I must give special thanks to my family who backed me emotionally especially my father for providing a supportive environment for my research work. Particular thanks must go to my supervisor Dr. Belmekki Belkacem who guided me at crucial times. I am deeply grateful to Pr. Yacine Rachida who gave me a chance to improve my humble work. My close friend, Boumedane Arbi must be thanked for supplying untiring enthusiasm and a source of intellectual stimulation during my work. I

Table of content Acknowledgments.I Table of Content...II List of Maps...IV Abbreviations...V Abstract...VI General Introduction... 8 CHAPTER I: Background to the Sudanese Conflict {1899-1956}...10 I.1 The Sudanese Ethnic Groups...11 I. 2 The Sudan under the Anglo Egyptian Policies {1899-1940 s }...13 I. 3 The Outbreak of the Sudanese Revolutionary Movements {1899-1940s }...23 I. 4 The Sudanese Nationalism and the Road to Independence {1940 s - 1956}...29 Chapter II: the Reasons behind the North- South Political Conflict and the Outbreak of the Southern Insurgencies {1956-1972}...36 II. 1 The Sudanese Political Status after Independence 1956-1972...36 II. 2 The Factors behind the North- South Conflict.40 II. 2. 1 The Colonial Factor...41 II. 2. 2 The Administrative Factor...43 II. 2. 3 The Ethnic Factor...45 II. 2. 4 The Religious Factor.47 II. 2. 5 The Foreign Factor...49 II. 3 The Outbreak of the Main Southern Insurgent Groups {1960 s - 1970s }...50 II. 3. 1 The Sudan African National Union {SANU} 1962.52 II. 3. 2 The Anya- Nya Movement. 1963.52 II. 3. 3 The Southern Sudan Liberation Movement {SSLM} 1969...55 II

II. 4. The Emergence of the Peaceful Agreements...56 II. 4. 1 The Round Table Conference. 1965..56 II. 4. 2 The Addis Ababa Agreement. 1972...59 Chapter III: The Escalation of the Conflict and the Quest for Foreign Aid. {1972-1989}.62 III. 1 The Sudan under the Peaceful Agreement {1972-1977}.62 III. 2 The Increased Sudanese Political Crisis {1975-1983}.66 III. 3 The Outset of The Southern People Liberation Movement {1983-1988}.73 III. 4 The Emergence of the Peaceful Agreement and the Quest for Foreign Aid {1986-1989}....81 General Conclusion....88 Bibliography 90 III

List of maps 1 Tribal Districts 12 2 The Anglo Egyptian Sudan 14 3 Missionary Spheres of Influence in the Southern Sudan...20 IV

Abbreviations DUP: Democratic Unionist Party. HEC: High Executive Council. NUP: National Unionist Party. PDP: People Democratic Party. SANU: Sudan African National Union. SPLA: Southern People Liberation Army. SPLM: Southern People Liberation Movement. SSIM: Southern Sudan Independence Movement. SSLM: Southern Sudan Liberation Movement. TMC: Transitional Military Council. V

Abstract In Africa, the spread of political violence has always been seen as a product of deep hatred embedded in the structures of war- torn societies. The Sudan is characterized by religious and cultural divisions between the North and the South in addition to cultural and tribal cleavages throughout the country. It is defined by conflict having suffered more than thirty- seven years of civil war interrupted by eleven years of peace since its independence in 1956. While the North of the Sudan is inhabited by Arab- Muslims, the South is populated by Christians and Animists who considered themselves as sub- Saharan people. The political conflict between the North and the South of the Sudan was rather a conflict between the government in the North and some Southern insurgent groups that refused to integrate with the North to form one unified community. This conflict was exacerbated by the advent of the Anglo Egyptian soldiers in 1899. During the Anglo Egyptian rule, the British were mainly occupied with establishing control and maintaining order. Through their occupation, the British attempted to hasten the process of evangelizing the Sudanese into Christianity so they gradually penetrated within the Sudan moving to the South creating there two policies: The Indirect Rule and the Southern Policy. The indirect rule encompassed different ordinances that were passed to bolster the work of native chiefs during the 1920 s. Following a violent military expeditions to gain control of the South, the colonial government imposed a new way of administration known as the Southern Policy. While in the North, the control of administration was in the hands of the state and secular leaders; in the South, the colonial government created self- contained tribal societies headed by traditional chiefs. The government tried to eradicate all Muslim influence by encouraging missionary activities with the use of English as Linga Franca in the South. The Southern Policy was introduced in 1930 through which new education and religion were launched in the South via the Christian Missionaries. Their influence became powerful with the growth of schools number and the great number of those who converted to Christianity. The dependence on missionary education in the South has not only meant a radically different educational system from that in the North but also more limited access to education for those living in the South. Awareness of this fact, the Sudanese withstood the British by organizing different movements including the religious ones but they were considered as early, unsuccessful resistances against colonialism; however, from 1940 s onward, the appearance of the Sudanese Nationalist movements was supported by the Egyptian Nationalists who fortified VI

these movements especially after the Egyptian revolution against the British in 1919. The concept of independence was asserted in the Sudan only after 1940 when the Sudanese sought for their freedom rather than looking for reforms; consequently, both the northerners and the southerners launched the process of self- rule leading to their independence via organizing elections for their own parliament and constitution. By the outset of the Sudanese independence, the first civil war broke out. This was because the idea of federalism that was suggested by the southerners before the British withdrawal was rejected by the northerners after their departure. For the southerners, the end of British rule meant the beginning of Arab domination and colonialism. For the northerners, the end of the colonial rule meant assumption of political power gaining sovereign status in the Sudan that includes the South as well. Having been denied their demands of federalism and dissatisfied with the government measures to arabize the educational and administrative systems in the South with restriction of Christian missionaries, many southerners pressed for separation and formation of their own state. Among the factors to the emergence of this conflict were: colonialism, administration, ethnicity, religion and foreign intervention. The outset of the Sudanese movements was considered as harbor for the southerners to claim their rights epitomized in asserting their identity and looking for regional autonomy. The peaceful agreement of 1972 was hailed as unique example of a negotiated peace settlement in Africa and the third world in general; nevertheless, it seemed that this agreement did not last for a long period of time when the war broke out again. The two wars were related and peace interlude may provide grounds for a better articulation of grievances from the first one. More than two million people have died and half a million Sudanese have spilled into neighboring countries. Both, the North and the South have perceived wars as a means of defending their identity and ensuring the survival of their political community. The call for a new democratic Sudan with no discrimination on the basis of race, culture and religion sounded utopia but it was a detail that the Sudanese did not focus on. The process of national integration depends on communication to break down the isolated regional identities and expose all areas to each other. VII

General Introduction General introduction The Sudan, formerly the largest country in Africa, encompasses different cultures, religions and ethnicities. The Sudan witnessed only 11 years of peace [1972-1983] between two civil wars [the first in 1955-1972 and the second in 1983-2005] since its independence from the Anglo Egyptian rule {1899-1956}. Since independence, the Sudan has gone through various phases according to which the politics of independence and the politics of revolution revealed the catastrophic situation within the country. Many regional issues in the Sudan caused a great havoc and harsh mutinies leading to both civil wars; among which the North- South political conflict that was deep- rooted to the era of the Anglo- Egyptian condominium. The question that is raised is why the political conflict between the North and the South remained a serious issue throughout different parliamentary and military regimes that the Sudan went through and why no regime succeeded to find an end to the civil wars, is there any external factor which instigated the Sudanese government to ignore the South? On this basis, many hypotheses can be raised: perhaps the most important factor to the conflict was the foreign intervention before independence and even after it or maybe this was due to the fact that the Sudanese government focused on the parliamentary issues such as the competition between the political parties to hold power, neglecting the operation of the most important policies toward the development of the South; Or perhaps, it was due to the lack of political experience from the part of the military leaders. The Sudan witnessed successive parliamentary and military systems; therefore, the political machinery was held by various political leaders and military rulers. My research work would be devoted to the political issue between the North and the South after independence of the Sudan as a republican country until 1989. My first chapter would convey an insight into the background of the conflict during the Anglo- Egyptian occupation before independence and which could introduce the idea of the North- South conflict that helps to comprehend the various historical facts and most important reasons for the emergence of the first civil war. The second chapter would examine the most significant factors for the outbreak of the first civil war after independence; moreover, it would tackle the major Southern movements 8

General Introduction passed as a reaction to the Northern domination over the South. Further, it analyzes the peaceful agreements organized to solve the conflict. My third chapter is devoted to the analysis of the 1983 events leading to the emergence of the second civil war that left a great damage and devastation in the whole country; besides, it specified the most powerful Southern movement that brought a kind of relief and an outlet to the southerners to defend themselves regarding its foreign aid from different African and Western countries; furthermore, it included the major negotiation meetings for reconciliation to assert the Southern identity, culture and their claim for regional autonomy. By and large, it is very worthy to discuss the Sudanese conflict that left an incredible mark on its progress not only on the basis of the political one but also on the basis of economic and social ones in order to understand their position nowadays as a poor, underdeveloped country. Since its independence, the Sudan has sunk in deep political issues which prevented it from establishing new relations with the foreign countries. Moreover, they formed a thwart to provide domestic stability within the country. 9

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Chapter I: Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956 It is noteworthy to know the Sudanese history that is deep- seated along decades of colonialism. The Sudan went through two periods of conquest intermediated by a period of native leadership: From 1820 to 1881, it was under the Turco Egyptian rule; becoming after a war; under the Mahdi, a Sudanese Muslim leader. The Mahdi ruled the Sudan from 1881 to 1885 when he was succeeded by the Khalifa Abdullah, a Sudanese Muslim ruler, who governed the Sudan until 1899. The Anglo Egyptian soldiers conquered the Sudan in 1899 until 1956. Vital revolutionary movements were organized to wage the war against the Anglo- Egyptian colonialism and which paved the way for the emergence of the Sudanese Nationalism that took place during the 1940 s. Thereof, procedures were passed; elections were held and conferences started leading to the Sudanese independence in 1956. In fact, colonialism in the Sudan left an incredible mark on the Sudanese in addition to the great havoc that flared- up by the end of colonialism and which culminated in a harsh civil war in 1955. It is so arduous to analyze the Sudanese conflicts since the outstanding feature which characterized the Sudan was its diversity concerning ethnicity, culture, religion and language. Indeed; with this diversity, the Sudan was sinking in a dilemma of political and religious issues. In order to understand the political conflict between the North and the South of the Sudan, one can see how the Sudanese society was organized before colonial rule that was considered as a factor for this conflict in the sense that the Anglo Egyptian policies applied in the Sudan fostered the discrimination between the Northern and the Southern part of the country. Thus, a required analysis concerning both: ethnicity and colonialism should be tackled to have a clear image about the political conflict in the Sudan. 10

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. I.1 The Sudanese ethnic groups The Sudan has been well- known for its heterogeneous population divided between The Nomads and The Nilotes. The Nomadic group represents the Northern population and the Nilotic group represents the Southern population. Each group includes a number of ethnic sub- groups. The Nomadic group includes three ethnic sub- groups: the Nubians, the Beja and the Kababish. The Nubian ethnic group is located between two regions; Wadi Halfa and Aldaba. The Kababish occupies the western part of the North between Dongola and Kordofan. Nevertheless, the Beja ethnic group is situated in the North East of the Sudan around The Red Sea Hills. Concerning their religion, all The Nomads in the North are Arab Muslims. 1 The Nilotic group includes four ethnic sub- groups: the Dinka, the Nuer, the Azande and the Shilluk. Both the Dinka and the Azande are located in the South West of the Sudan and the Nuer occupies the Southern east part of the country. The Shilluk ethnic group is located near the Upper Nile in the South. 2 Religiously speaking, the Nilotes in the South are African Animists and Christians. In order to understand the relation between both groups, one should see their positions during the 1880 s. Both, the Nomads and the Nilotes were ruled by their tribal leaders in 1880; however, from 1881 to 1885, the Mahdi succeeded to consolidate the three ethnic groups in the North under his leadership whereas the Southern ethnic groups remained separated and isolated from the North. The Mahdi tried to impose Islam all over the country by force but this was rejected by the Southern groups. After his death, the Khalifa Abdullah carried on this mission as a Muslim leader. This led to a conflict between the Khalifa Abdullah and these Southern groups that became more fragmented. 3 Therefore, the situation between the North and the South became more complicated. This rivalry was exacerbated by the arrival of the Anglo Egyptian forces. districts. The following map showed the Northern and Southern ethnic groups as well as the tribal 1 Gabriel Warburg, Islam Nationalism And Communism In a Traditional Society: The Case Of Sudan, London: Frank Cass, 1978, P. 1. 2 Collins, Robert O. Land Beyond the Rivers: the Southern Sudan, 1898-1918, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1971, p. 52. 3 Mohamed Omer Beshir, Revolution and Nationalism in the Sudan, Rex Collings, London, 1974, P. 17. 11

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Map 1: Tribal Districts. Source: Robert O. Collins, op. cit, p. 52. 12

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. I.2 The Sudan under the Anglo Egyptian policies. 1899-1940 s When the British invaded Egypt in 1882, they hardly tried to conquer the Sudan to get more colonies in Africa. In 1896, they attempted to do so but they failed; nevertheless, in their second attempt, they succeeded. Their success was achieved in November 1898 under the Lord Herbert Kitchener. After their occupation, the British hardly tried to assert their culture and religion pretending that their invasion was intended to improve the economic status of the country as Wakefield, a prominent English surveyor, stated: The general aim of the British rule was to help the economic development of the country and to lead the Sudan to independence, the original object of the pacification having more or less been achieved. 4 The prelude of the relation between the British and the Sudanese formalized a picture of uncivilized society which should be assisted and organized by the British as servants of the country thought that this was their duty. As a consequence, the British found a way to foster their education and religion [Christianity]. As far as the South is concerned, the British considered the provinces that surrounded the Nile River as a territory that David Livingstone explored in his mission 5. Consequently, it was their right to explore them and to penetrate within the Southern Sudan. The Sudanese provinces are shown under the Anglo Egyptian forces in the following map. 4 Francis M. Deng, M. W. Daly, Bonds of Silk, Michigan State University Press, East Lansing. Michigan, 1989, p. 67. 5 Harvey Glickman, Ethnic conflicts: Islamism in Sudan s civil war, spring 2000, p. 5. 13

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Map 2: The Anglo Egyptian Sudan. Source: Peter Woodward, Condominium and Sudanese Nationalism, Barnes and Nobles, USA, 1979, Preface. 14

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Concerning the condominium, the Egyptians agreed with the British on the idea of colonialism but they disagreed on the concept of administration. This was because the British intended to rule the Sudan by themselves for their own sake as Zubayr Ahmed Al Malik, a Northern Sudanese contributor, reported in his quotation: They pretended to be equal but one did not really believe it. These people were people who had come to rule ages. They did serve the Sudan, but of course don t forget that in the first place they were serving their own country, their people, and themselves, and they knew that. 6 At the very beginning of their occupation, the British were more concerned with the Northern part of the Sudan because they always feared that the Egyptians would integrate the Northern Sudan with Egypt. Moreover; they thought that the Northerners were superior to the Southerners as Gordon Muortat Mayen, a Southern Sudanese contributor, quoted: No statement was made openly by any of the British officials, saying that Northerners were better than Southerners. But they used to hint all the time that the Northerners would replace Southerners if the Southerners didn t receive political safeguards some of them used to give hints that the domination of the Southerners by the Northerners could not be avoided in a unitary system because Northerners are superior to Southerners. 7 This was contradicted by Howell, a British governor general, who believed that the British were specifically interested in the Southern Sudan and his whole mission of any development should be in the South as he mentioned: It was not anti- Northern in outlook but I was much concerned with the lack of development in the South and the illogic of a minority policy without much more development or effort invested in the South. I did not think, either, that the Northern Sudanese had the knowledge or sense of mission to assume my role in the South. 8 As far as the administration is concerned, the British leaders ruled the North whereas the Northern rulers held different posts in the South. 9 According to the Northern belief, the British pretention that the two parts of the country should be distinctively treated was based on the concept that they were different. 10 6 Francis M. Deng, M. W. Daly, op. cit., p. 122. 7 Ibid., p. 191. 8 Ibid., pp. 65-66. 9 Douglas H. Johnson, the Root Causes of Sudan s Civil Wars, Indiana University Press, US and Canada, 2003, p. 9. 10 Francis M. Deng, M.W. Daly, op. Cit., p. 126. 15

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. The Sudanese did not remain passive; on the contrary, they resisted the colonial rule. Thereof, the British mitigated these resistances through the pacification system that was introduced in 1920. This system was applied by the British to have the control on the colonized people. Indeed, with this system, the British easily and autonomously found a way for the operation of their policies epitomized in the Indirect Rule and the Southern Policy. The indirect rule policy was introduced as an aftermath of the deficiency concerning the number of the colonial officials and which led to the British quest for collaborators. This policy also emerged as a consequence of the issue that confronted the British and which was how to govern the Southern people who were more violent. Their aim was to segregate the various ethnic groups from each other to prevent the conflict between them. Kitchener stated that the best way to pacify these ethnic groups was through choosing tribal elite that could have an impact on them. 11 This policy was put into practice to halt the influence of the educated elite in the South so that the British enhanced the tribal rulers with such authority over their tribal groups. 12 It was implemented in the South by the indigenous chiefs to rule their tribes under the supreme governance of the district commissioner. Moreover, this policy encompassed various ordinances that were passed to limit the contact between the North and the South. In 1922, The Passports and Permits Ordinance was passed in order to provide a system of enclosure in the Southern districts so that no Northerner would cross the region. 13 During the same year, the Powers of Nomad Sheikhs Ordinance was introduced. It fostered the authority of the Sheikhs and enlarged its sphere of influence in the South. 14 Other ordinances were passed by the British to encourage the power of the tribal chiefs during the 1930s such as: the Sheikhs Ordinance of 1927, the Chief Court Ordinance of 1931 and the Native Courts Ordinance of 1932. These ordinances succeeded to revive the work of the traditional rulers in the South rather than in the North. Therefore, the Southern rulers exercised certain privileges which the Northern ones were deprived of. The Northern rulers did not appreciate this fact that caused an issue between both regions. 11 Amir Idris, Conflicts and Politics of Identity in Sudan, Palgrave Mac Millan, Hampshire. England, 2005, p. 36. 12 Savo Heleta, Roots of Sudanese Conflicts are in the British Colonial Policies, January 2008. 13 David Sconyers, PH. D Thesis: British Policy and Mission Education in Southern Sudan, University of Pennsylvania, 1978, p. 28. 14 Muddathir Abd Al Rahim, Imperialism and Nationalism in the Sudan, Oxford Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1969, p. 68. 16

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. In addition to this policy, the British launched another policy in 1930 in the South to improve the Southern situation thought that the South was secluded from the outside world while the North was more opened to the foreign countries in terms of economic progress. This policy encompassed a new religion and education in the South. Through this policy, the paternalism system was introduced by the British to provide protection, as they pretended, to the South. Concerning the administration, the British officials aimed to segregate the South from the North by depriving the South from their representation within the Sudanese government in the North and creating new contact with the British east colonies such as: Kenya rather than the Middle East. 15 Three important figures were in charge with the progress of this policy: Sir Harold Mac Michael {civil secretary 1926-1934}, Sir Stewart Symes {governor general 1934-1944}, and Sir James Robertson {civil secretary 1945-1953}. 16 The Southern policy encompassed three aspects: First, the use of six dialects in the South {Dinka-Nuer-Bari-Moru- Ndogo-Shilluck} for the primary schools. Second, the dismissal of the Egyptian and Northern clerks from their jobs as administrators of the South. Third, the use of English language as Linga Franca. 17 Religiously speaking, the Reverend Wilson Cash, Secretary of the Church Missionary Society, declared in 1930 that the British rule in the Sudan did separate religion from state in the sense that the work of the government had nothing to do with the work of the Christian missionaries as he stated: The government is scrupulously fair to Muslims and Pagans, and in religious matters adopts a strictly neutral attitude. The task of evangelization is no part of the government s work and it falls to the mission alone to decide whether these Southern pagan tribes shall be left to be captured for Islam or whether they shall be won for Jesus Christ. 18 The missionaries reported that the church in the South should do its best to widen its influence and to prevent the spread of Islam in the South as they quoted: the church is called on to face the impact of new and wider forces, to seek to understand them, to quicken the effectiveness of her witness (and) to equip the people so that they assimilate what is new without upsetting the basis of their lives. The primary aim of the mission is to build up a 15 Muddathir Abd Rahim, op. cit., p. 74. 16 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 63. 17 Francis M. Deng, M.W. Daly, op. cit., p. 126. 18 Francis M. Deng, Sudan- Civil War and Genocide: Disappearing Christians of the Middle East, Middle East Quarterly, Vol. VII, Winter 2001, pp. 13-21. 17

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. stable self- expanding church which will be able to hold its own against Islamic penetration under changing political conditions. 19 Five missionary groups were present in Southern Sudan from 1928 until 1946. The first group was known as the Roman Catholic Verona Fathers who were Italians. This group comprised about 150 to 300 priests from 1928 to 1946. The second group was the Church Missionary Society derived from the Anglican Church. The Anglicans concern was on education in post secondary schools. Their number was 19 at the outset and raised to 42 in 1946. The third group represented the Presbyterians who were members of the United Presbyterian church in USA. These three groups thrived in their mission from 1928 until 1936; however, from 1936 to 1946 their work of evangelization and education was controlled by the government. The fourth and the fifth groups successively represented the Sudan Interior Mission and Mill Hill Fathers that replaced the Verona Fathers. The Mill Hill fathers were less in number than that of Verona Fathers. As a whole, there were two Roman Catholic Missionaries: the Verona Fathers and Mill Hill one as well as the three Protestant Missionaries: the Church Missionary Society, the Sudan Interior Mission and the United Presbyterian Church. In 1930, all the missionaries were given admission to convert the Southern Sudanese into Christianity. 20 Daud Abd Al Latif, a Sudanese Muslim officer, mentioned that the impact of the missionaries had been spread in the South blocking the prevalence of Islam. This was clear in his quotation: when Kitchener came, the missionaries pushed very strongly in order to get spheres of influence in the South, but did not leave the door open for the Islam Islam was the purpose of the so- called Southern Policy. It recognized that Southern genius is distinctively African and Negroid. 21 Concerning education, the government launched the work of Christian missionaries in the South; however, it was rejected by the Northerners as they were Muslims. 22 The missionaries educational task took three phases to be achieved: from 1900 to 1926, it was only held by the missionaries; nevertheless, from 1926 to 1946, the government interfered in 19 Deng D. Akol Ruay, the Politics of two Sudans: the South and the North 1821-1969, the Scandinavian Institute of African Studies,Uppsala, 1994, p. 45. 20 David Sconyers, op. cit., pp. 110-114. 21 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 74. 22 Douglas H. Johnson, op. cit., p. 14. 18

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. their mission and from 1946 up to 1957, it was completely held by the government. Both the missionaries and the government were in charge with the Southern education. 23 From 1930 onward, there was a noticeable growth in the number of schools from 30 elementary schools to 57 in 1945. 24 Their education was more effective since, during the 1930 s, its influence became wide in the South and its great role became an outstanding element within the Sudanese society in particular and the African one in general. 25 It was a watershed in the Southern tribal system as Symes declared: Southern societies are being reformed along indigenous patterns in accordance with their natural capacities and material requirements. This has been associated with the North and Christianity with the South, creating a certain pattern. 26 The following map showed the impact of the Christian missionaries in the South. 23 Deng D. Akol Ruay, op. cit., p. 44. 24 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 127. 25 M. W. Daly, Imperial Sudan, Cambridge University Press, Great Britain, 1991, p. 113. 26 Francis M. Deng, M. W. Daly, op. cit., p. 125. 19

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Map 3: Missionary Spheres of Influence in the Southern Sudan. Source: Robert O. Collins, Op. Cit., p. 294. 20

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. The educational system applied in the North was based on the Arab Islamic principles whereas in the South, it was based on the work of the missionaries. The differentiation concerning the educational policy in both regions contributed to the discrimination between both parts of the Sudan for the Northerners recognized that the work of the missionaries created a thwart for the spread of Islam and Arabic language in the South. In 1932, the educational system applied in the South began to deteriorate as the government marked a shortage concerning the posts for work. 27 This was exacerbated during the Second World War when the Northern education witnessed a swift progress while the Southern education witnessed a deep failure. Moreover, no attempt was organized to fix this issue. 28 Thus, the educational system in the North became more important rather than the one in the South. Under the Southern policy, more southerners were granted different administrative posts. Moreover; the British found a way, through this policy, to encourage the domination of Christianity and western education in the South. 29 Mac Michael, a British Civil Secretary, was among those who fostered this policy as he stated: every encouragement should be given to those in charge of mission schools to operate by sending boys into government service, every effort should be made to make English the means of communication to the complete exclusion of Arabic, a part from the fact that the restriction of Arabic is an essential feature of the general scheme, it must not be forgotten that Arabic, being neither the language of the governing nor the governed, will progressively deteriorate. 30 Besides, Stewart Symes, a British Governor General, believed that the Southern Policy should free the South from the Northern influence as he reported: The general requirements of the people and the local policy of the government have been explained to missionaries and the importance of preserving the best elements in tribal life has been pointed out where necessary. 31 As a result, from 1930 onward, the South became compelled to a system of enclosure, secluded from the outside world, ruled by the British officials and some Southern native 27 M. W. Daly, op. cit., p. 39. 28 Ibid., p. 201. 29 Francis M. Deng, M.W. Daly, op. cit., p. 172. 30 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 65. 31 Ibid., p.73. 21

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. clerks. Since this policy was only limited to the South, the northerners refused it believing that it encouraged the segregation between both regions. The only implementation that was done in the North was the establishment of a church in Khartoum for those non-muslims who settled there. 32 It was palpable that the Southern Policy in the South did not foster any Southern attempt to form a group of Southern educated people to represent themselves within the government. 33 Robertson, a British Governor General, criticized the Southern Policy as he mentioned: the Southern Policy had to be opened up and brought into touch with reality. The people there could not be segregated any longer into a kind of human zoo. 34 In addition; Gordon Mayen, a Northern Sudanese Contributor, mentioned that not only the British separated the integrity of the Sudanese ethnic groups through this policy but he also believed that the British intended to do so in order to strengthen the rivalry between the Sudanese as he noted: The British also created differences between the Dinka and other tribes. They tried to give the impression that some tribes were dominant over others as policy of divide and rule- to weaken, to keep people always in conflict. 35 Under this policy, the southerners did not go beyond certain extent of any economic or administrative development. For the northerners, this policy was considered as an impediment toward prosperity in the South; in addition, they recognized that it was time for the Sudanese to pass the procedures for their independence from the Anglo- Egyptian occupation. For this purpose, they constrained the British to call off this policy. 36 After the abrogation of the Southern Policy in 1946, it was suitable for the northerners to apply their educational system in the South but they faced an issue with the Christian missionaries as their work was still vivid in the South. 37 The Northern region tried to retrieve the South. From 1945, the Sudanese government embarked in ruling the South. 38 The British Southern Policy was the factor for the Southern primitiveness and the practice of both policies (the Southern Policy and Indirect Rule) represented an obstacle for 32 Muddathir Abd Al Rahim, op. cit., p. 72. 33 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 85. 34 Ibid., p. 91. 35 Ibid. 36 Deng D. Akol Ruay, op. cit., p. 48. 37 M. W. Daly, op. cit., p. 330. 38 Roland Oliver, Anthony Atmore, Africa since 1800, Cambridge University Press (4 th ed), New York, USA, 1967, p. 172. 22

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. the Sudanese development. 39 The aftermath of the achievement of the Southern Policy, the work of the missionaries and the limited contact between both regions was the split between the Northern and Southern part of the Sudan. 40 To conclude, the British did not succeed to form a deepen plan for the Sudanese future because there was a great vacuum between the aim of the Southern Policy and its real implementation. 41 The British plan of both policies granted the South their gradual autonomy from the North and brought various trends toward heterogeneity between the two regions. Both policies; the indirect rule and the Southern Policy exacerbated the situation between the North and the South. I.3 The outbreak of the Sudanese revolutionary movements (1899-1940 s ). The foreign countries thought that the Anglo Egyptian occupation of the Sudan in 1899 finalized the Sudanese revolts and put a premise for new Sudanese progress in all the fields. Once the tribal chiefs and the educated Sudanese were convinced that the colonial rule would not leave the Sudan, the early resistance started. 42 The Sudanese opposition to the colonial rule started from the early years of the Condominium in different regions in the Sudan. Whenever the Anglo- Egyptian government faced any resistance from the Sudanese, it used violence. Nevertheless, no serious war was waged. A great number of Southern tribes and Northern ones in Nuba Mountains opposed the colonial rule. When the British invaded the Sudan, the number of their soldiers was 25800 men among whom there were the Egyptians. 52000 soldiers of the Khalifa waged the war against the invaders in Omdurman 1898. However, this revolt ended in failure since the British were more powerful. The Sudanese became disappointed after the catastrophic struggle during which the Khalifa was defeated. As a consequence, successive battles were waged in 1900. 43 The most outstanding revolt was that of the Sudanese troops against the British and which broke out in 1900. Actually, these troops were the prisoners of the Khalifa s military forces and who formed, after the defeat of the Khalifa, with the Egyptian army Kitchener s 39 Ibid., p. 341. 40 Muddathir Abd Al Rahim, op. cit., p. 73. 41 David Sconyers, op. cit., p. 96. 42 Mohamed Omer Beshir, Revolution and Nationalism in the Sudan, op. cit., p. 47. 43 Muddathir Abd el Rahim, op. cit., pp. 89-90. 23

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. military forces. So immediately after the conquest, when Kitchener went to South Africa for a mission, these Sudanese troops revolted and killed most of the British officers. In Nuba Mountains, a clash between the British and Northern Sudanese occurred; consequently, the only resort for the British was pacification since the clash was so violent. The Nubians were strong enough to defend themselves. It was so arduous for the British to establish a new administration in the Nuba Mountains as the mountaineers were so steady and accepted no foreign rule. In 1904, the Nubians achieved a victory against the British after a violent insurgency. Moreover, in 1915, the Nubians planned for a rebellion under Fiki Ali Almi against the British at Kadugli but they failed. In 1917-18, the government attempted to attack the Hill s population. This left a great damage in the villages where a hundred of people died. 44 For the third time, the Nubians succeeded to make a new kind of mutiny against the British during the First World War. 45 The British did not remain passive, they tried to pacify the struggle but it was not possible. As far as the South is concerned, the Agar Dinka mutiny was organized in January 1902 and was followed by the Dinka Atwort mutiny. 46 A British official was killed in the Agar Dinka mutiny; thereof, the British sent a patrol against them and a great number of Sudanese were murdered. In 1903, the British sent a force to mitigate the rebellion of Dinka Atwort on Lau River; as a result, both of the Dinka mutinies failed. Various battles succeeded in different areas such as the battle organized by The Nyam Nyam Tribe against the British in 1903 under the Captain Wood. There were other revolts raised against the British but they were all subdued in Dinka, Nuer and other Southern tribes. Concerning the areas near the Blue Nile, one of the most violent revolts was the one of Abd Al Qadir at Katfia on the Blue Nile in 1908. He created a group of educated Sudanese against the regime but he was defeated by the British troops on 17 th, May 1908. 47 Another attack was planned against the Annuack tribe, in 1912, which caused the death of three British, three Sudanese officers and forty two soldiers. Until 1917, the last revolt was subdued and the 44 Mohamed Omer Beshir, Revolution and Nationalism in the Sudan, op. cit., p. 48. 45 M. W. Daly, Empire on the Nile: the Anglo Egyptian Sudan 1898-1934, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom, 1986, pp. 129-131. 46 Ibid., p. 142. 47 Ibid., p. 125. 24

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. British succeeded to pervade Peace. 48 In 1926, the Tapossa tribe was the last tribe to be pacified. The Sudan witnessed Twenty five years of opposition especially in the Southern tribes that were hardly subdued by the British to proceed their policies. All these early resistances did not epitomize what is called Nationalism. They were only revolts led by tribal leaders against the foreigners. Religiously speaking, there were other movements organized against the foreigners such as the religious movement that took place in 1904 under Mohamed Wad Adam but he was killed with his men. Successive religious movements followed in 1906-07 but they all failed. In 1908, Abdel Wahab raised another revolt; however, he was imprisoned with his men. Other religious revolts followed in 1909, 1912 and 1915; nevertheless, they were all pacified and their leaders were arrested. The British belief that the Sudanese revolts would shake their stability led to the fact that they ceased all the Sudanese revolts in all the regions. 49 After 1919, the Sudanese raised their first National resistance against the British looking for their independence. It was considered as early unimportant opposition made by a group of traders. 50 After a period of destruction during the first years of the colonial rule, the birth of the political awareness became widely dispersed and epitomized in what was called The Sudanese Nationalism through the Nationalist Movements. 51 This political awareness which emerged in 1920 paved the way to form various political institutions. The Sudanese Nationalism was only limited to the Northern Sudanese who asserted the Arab- Islamic principles as the basic components of the country and sought for the independence of their country. The Nationalist Movements were formed by different groups that were organized by qualified leaders. The Sudanese Union Society that started in 1920 was considered as the first nationalist movement that was established by a group of 6 Sudanese Graduates appointed by the Sudanese government. It was led by Obeid Hag Al Amin under the membership of: Tewfik Salih Gibil, Abdullah Khalil, Mohamed Salih Shingeiti, Khalafallah Khalid. Their 48 M.W. Daly, Imperial Sudan, op. cit., p. 132. 49 M. W. Daly, Empire on the Nile 1898-1934, op. cit., p. 118. 50 M. W. Daly, Imperial Sudan, op. cit., pp. 76-83. 51 Muddathir Abd Al Rahim, op. cit., p. 93. 25

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. political mission was to attack the British administration in the Sudan. The leader of this movement believed that the Sudanese should support the Egyptians preventing the disintegration between Egypt and the Sudan 52. The movement became widely spread and created many manifestations in various towns such as: Khartoum, Omdurman, Wadi Halfa, Al Obeid and Port Sudan. In 1921, Ali Abdel Latif, a Sudanese Muslim officer, established The United Tribes Society that aimed to grant the Sudanese their autonomy under the membership of the tribal chiefs and the religious ones. This nationalist organization was transformed to The White Flag League. Through time, the Sudanese Union Society was linked, under Obeid Hag Al Amin, with The White Flag League under Ali Abdel Latif in 1923 to be heard by the government. 53 Indeed, this league was organized for the purpose of integrating the regions around the Nile Valley with Egypt. It also put a quest for new posts in terms of education; however, this was not answered by the government. Despite the fact that the British relegated the members of the league, the league succeeded to enlarge its sphere of influence. It was composed of significant members: 23 officers, 39 junior officials, 2 sub- mamurs, 2 quadis and the imam of the Khartoum mosque. 54 The Sudanese officers were also included within both: the Sudanese Union Society and the White Flag League to hold high ranks after the exclusion of the Egyptian officers from the Sudan by the British because of the Egyptian revolution against the British in 1919. In addition, most of the Sudanese insurgents who fought the British were included in the White Flag League. 55 Since some Egyptian nationalists started to be included within the league, the league was broken by the British and its members were excluded to a jail in the South. 56 After the Egyptian revolution in 1919 against the British, the Egyptians were forced to leave the Sudan. This led to the fact that the Sudanese became compelled to any British policy. An important upheaval occurred when, in 1924, Sir Lee Stack was killed in Egypt. His murder was seen as a response to the exclusion of the Egyptian officers from the Sudan. Allenby, a British High Commissioner, ordered the remaining Egyptians to evacuate the 52 Muddathir Al Rahim, op. cit., p. 104. 53 Ibid. 54 M. W. Daly, Imperial Sudan, op. cit., p. 293. 55 Ibid., p. 309. 56 Ibid. p. 344. 26

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. Sudan after this event. 57 The Egyptian government refused the withdrawal of the Egyptians from the Sudan. This created an issue with the British especially when the Sudanese insurgents joined the Egyptian troops against the British. This created another skirmish between the British and the Sudanese who moved northward toward Khartoum in order to join the Egyptians. This clash ended by the death of many officers on both sides. The revolt of 1924 ended in failure and all the Egyptians were banished from the Sudan. The Anglo Egyptian government recognized that the Sudanese movements had been fortified and became full- fledged so that it should take by consideration their influence. In fact, as an aftermath of the Egyptian revolution succeeded by the events of 1924 including the murder of Sir Lee Stack, the British decided to introduce a new kind of administration in Southern Sudan. The Southern policy was considered by the Sudanese as an aftermath of the policy of divide and rule applied by the British in the Sudan. The events of 1924 and the British policies applied in the South played a vital role in contributing to the rise of the Sudanese Nationalism. For personnel interest, in 1936, a treaty was signed between the Egyptians and the British to allow the presence of the Egyptians in the Sudan in return the British would protect the Suez Canal and some areas in Egypt. Thus, both the Egyptians and the British renewed the Anglo Egyptian treaty signed in 1899 and both governed the Sudan for the second time. The treaty of 1936 was not welcomed by the Sudanese Nationalists who became more furious once Egypt became the second ruler of the Sudan. Consequently, The Sudanese nationalists recognized that the achievement of their national aims required a real sense of determination and co-operation. In order to fortify their sense of determination and cooperation, the Nationalists used their religious movements as a means to achieve their objective. Religiously speaking, there were two sects in the Sudan: the Khatmiya and the Ansar. The former was headed by Sayid Ali Al Mirghani and the latter was headed by Sayid Abdel Rahman Al Mahdi. Both of them were opposed to each other and each one tried to win the support of the people. Each sect was eager to hold in its members the educated Sudanese. 57 Collins, Shadows in the Grass: Britain in the Southern Sudan 1918-1956, pp. 42-73. 27

A Background to the Sudanese Conflict. 1899-1956. As far as the Ansar is concerned, Sayid Abdel Rahman Al Mahdi gained the support of the majority of educated Sudanese and he was seen by the Ansar as a prominent figure to guide a National Movement. His movement was known as The Mahdist Movement. Nevertheless, he was seen by the Anglo Egyptian government as a threat since Stewart Symes, a British Governor General, felt that his movement would be powerful enough to assert the Sudanese Nationalism. In reality, Sayid Al Mahdi became an outstanding figure within the administrative conferences. Therefore, the British tried to dethrone him. Even if he showed hostility against Egypt and bolstered the Sudanese government with useful instructions, he was checked in each province in the Sudan. In addition, he assisted the Sudanese Graduates to establish the General Congress. Mahdism became an influential movement that thrived to form its political party: the Umma Party after the Second World War. 58 In 1946, the Mahdism became a Neo- Mahdism with further political perspective rather than a mere religious and National movement. Concerning the Graduates Congress, there was a group among the Sudanese Nationalists; which sought for the Sudanese independence. Their slogan was the Sudan for the Sudanese. 59 To seek for their independence, the Sudanese became compelled to the British with no link to the Egyptians. So, on 12 February 1938, the Graduates General Congress was founded by 1180 Graduates of the Gordon College gathered in Omdurman including Ismail Al Azhari, a Sudanese Nationalist and Political Figure and a member of the Anglo Egyptian government. The congress members were inclined to contribute in the Sudanese Nationalism and their sense of patriotism was felt by Symes. This congress became famous among the graduates and non- graduates especially when it was involved within the government once Ismail Al Azhari was re- elected. Moreover, it was more concerned with the missions that were specifically held in the South like education. The Anglo Egyptian government did not appreciate these facts that became inadequate to it. 58 Mohamed Omer Beshir, Revolution and Nationalism in the Sudan, op. cit., p. 150. 59 Ahmed Khair, Kifah Jil, Cairo, 1948, p. 22. 28