<!DOCTYPE ht…

View Larger Map

Sudan Needs a Middle Way

South Sudan Needs a Middle Way
Kit Martin
Written from Cairo Egypt

As the Republic of South Sudan emerges as the newest nation, the time for solutions driven by the latent talents of Sudanese citizens has arrived. Such a direction requires a new plan to invigorate the nation, to both build national unity, and respect the difference inherent in a nation of so many languages, geographies and laws.

South Sudan has fought for fair local determination since 1956. By 1960, in Africa the colonial empire’s contractions left a slew of new nations contained in arbitrary boundaries governed by the Leaders of the Revolutions operated by the remainder of the colonial bureaucracy.

In Sudan, the largest nation in Africa, Britain’s boundaries contained hundreds of languages, governed by a 19th-century bureaucracy residing in Khartoum. The distance and consequent differences between the government of Khartoum in the north and the population of the south precipitated a series of internecine conflicts over the rights of self-determination. These wars and feuds continued until the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005.

These conflicts bred a generation of military men. Guardians of a revolution and now, on July 9, 2011 leaders of a new nation. Ravaged by half a century of conflict, and a century before that of Egyptian and British colonial rule, South Sudan has both been governing itself regionally, while constituting a broken collection of feuding groups for over a century.

This new nation emerges from one of the bloodiest civil wars in Africa, with an estimated 2 million dead, and 4 million in permanent exile the human costs of war are as apparent in the government structures of south Sudan as anywhere. Governors and leaders are selected from those who led during the crisis of war. But now, the country needs men of peace.

The people of Sudan have always provided for their regional needs through local leadership. It should be recalled that top down governance led to Sudan’s civil wars because of disenfranchisement of minority groups’ common laws. South Sudan is made of hundreds of minority groups, and so any government that wishes to avoid the emergence of a post independence authoritarian government in South Sudan needs to respect this mosaic of governing bodies.

In other words, south Sudan should harness the diversity to create a stronger whole. The government, and its foreign donors seek to invigorate the nation’s abilities to reinforced citizens’ capacities, while respecting the differences inherent in a nation of so many languages, geographies and laws.

Though, the budget of the Republic will be provided by oil revenues for the foreseeable future, balancing between the realities of international standards of human rights, while maintaining self-determination will be an ongoing issue.

The new nation is between rocky shoals, on the one side is the dangers of a descent into authoritarian government funded by large oil revenues and a perceived need to protect itself from northern aggression, on the other is the need to strengthen local governance by legitimate elections at all levels of government. If South Sudan, which has fought for self-determination for 50 years crashes on these shores a common story is easily foreseeable. If the newest nation can maintain its founding values of local governance, while buttressing the security of the nation, South Sudan has a bright future.

Doom is a Pool

Kit Martin

The Introduction of Islam reconciled the disparate Arab communities of the Arabian Peninsula. The shift of values in battle poetry is exemplary of the broader change that led to this unification. Before the introduction of Islam, in Jahiliyya there where three values held in esteem: loyalty, generosity and courage to your kinsmen. Arab poetry, after Muhammad still held these cultural ideas in the highest regard, but added a cultural value of supporting a universal Islam, which included all believers into one super community. In the following pages I will demonstrate an expansion of who is included through an examination of the values held by two authors al-Tabari and Antar Ibn Shaddad. The expansion will go from a focus on the kinsmen affiliation into a focus on a united community of all believers that transcended blood ties by binding the many Arab kinsmen groups together. I will begin by demonstrating the values in Jahilyya in Antar Ibn Shaddad’s work from Irwin’s Knight Horses. Then move on to examine the battle of al-Qådisiyyah as a whole, using the writing as a whole to analyze the values held in regard. This examination will show what qualities were considered valuable in a warrior, and by extension in a battle, stayed the same but these values transmission expanded to encompass an ever-greater number of people through the propagation of Islam. This expanded group solidarity provided a motivating force that gave the Caliphate the ability to mobilize men to engage more empires on more fronts than any state ever had done before. There is, of course, the danger that the values being expressed in these writings are only the values of the culture who compiled the oral transmissions into a History or a written poetry several hundred years later, this danger is one that, though considerable, if recognized mostly mitigated.
The glorification of the murruwwa of one man––the hero of Antar Ibn Shaddad’s poem [Irwin 17]––sets the stage for the difference between the two poetic periods. Antar Ibn Shaddad’s hero of his poem acts alone against external dangers, and does so to vaunt his own identity beyond his inevitable death. He takes action for his own glorification through the demonstration of his ability to uphold the virtues of manliness by engaging in battle. Thus, the emphasis on ‘I’ in this poem is emblematic of the poet’s value of what is a warrior; because it reveals in part his mindset. That is himself verse an unnumbered enemy. Consequently, his fate and his actions are the primary concern of this poem. Two other important characteristics of the poet’s mindset have to be mentioned to understand the culture of the poet. The first is his view on life and death, and then his view on the reason to take life. So first, the poet takes with him into battle a pervasive fatalism, “‘Doom is a pool,’ I told her then, /‘And to drink one day is my destined lot, / so keep your silence, woman, and know:/ This man, unless slain, is fated to die”[Irwin 17]. It is clear here that the poet considers having no remorse for the death he inflicts on his foes, and also no regret for his own death is appropriate for a warrior. Moreover because death is inevitable, making an image for yourself that will live on is important, thus poets demonstrating heros’ prowess in life is important, because it creates the image of a life that will live on. Like building a Pyramid, it creates something that will outlast the Pharo’s life. The second point of the poets mind is tied to the glorification of self. This glorification of self is put forward in the poems.

Yet doom, if shaped in flesh, would appear
in mine when the enemy, cornered, dismount.
On spear side second to none of ‘Abs,
with sword I defend my distaff side.
when squadrons flaring to war engage
my mettle tells more than ancestral pride;
full well the hero-horsemen know
that by cut and thrust I broke their array,
not overrunning the line in attack
nor taking on the first man come
[Irwin, 17]

The most evident feature here is the prowess of the hero. His sword protects his wife, his spear thwarts his enemies, he takes on his enemies alone and skillfully. He fights for his own image to be enlarged; the poem itself becomes a vehicle to enlarge his own image for its continuation after death. Of note here too, His only idea of kin is his distaff side, his own closest relations but there is not mention of a larger social identification beyond family. There is no reaching for something external to his most immediate social surrounding, because to admit that something external to himself was important would be to admit his own faculties’ short comings. So we see in Jahiliyya, the fatalist outlook of the culture led to a desire to preserve disparate groups’ images, and this concentration on an individual group detracted from a greater group unification.
This individual glorification––when contrasted to a selection from the Battle of al-Qådisiyyah where the hero fights for the glory of Islam — demonstrates the difference between the texts’ values toward battle. In the poetry of the Jahiliyya a man’s glory relied on his own prowess in battle, whereas for the Muslim poet a man’s glory relied on his “striving in the path of God”. The people striving to follow the path being forwarded by the Muslim faith, because of a unity in religious paradigms, are perhaps likely to follow a similar path as each other.

A Persian warrior came forth, calling out: “Who is going to fight me?” ‘Ilba b. Jabsh al-Jili went forth against him. Ilba struck the Persian with his sword and pierced his chest, but the Persian struck ‘Ilba’ with his sword and disemboweled him. Both fell to the ground, the Persian dying immediately. As for Ilba, his bowels spilled out and he could not get up; he attempted to put his bowels back but was unable to do it. Then a Muslim passed by and ‘Ilba said: “A so-and-so, help with my belly!” The Muslim put his bowels back, and Ilba held the slit skin of his belly together and rushed toward the Persian lines without turning his face to the Muslims. Death befell him thirty cubits from the place where he had been struck, in the direction of the Persian Lines, He recited

I hope I shall receive reward for this from our Lord;
I was one of those who fought well.
[Battle al-Qådisiyyah 102]

The value the poet puts on the heroes weakness, an example of the limits of the hero’s own faculties, demonstrates a shift between Jahiliyya and Islamic battle values. Before the shift in values becomes apparent, three key points must be highlighted from this passage about the nature of the Muslim warrior’s battle values. First the values of Murruwwa are the same for the Muslim Arab as the Jahiliyya Arab writer. As demonstrated when Ilba accepted the Persian’s challenge, showing his bravery; when he slew the Persian, showing his strength; and when the Persian disemboweled him he charged the enemy anyways, showing his endurance. Here, though, the difference between the two poets’ values arises. Second, another Muslim helped put his bowls back in, demonstrating the cultural value of being supported by fellow Muslims. Finally, when he dies, he dies hoping for God’s reward. God being a unifying concept that goes beyond social ties allowing for the construction of a super community — a community built on an idea that transcends blood ties. So individually strong characters are still valued in this writing, as they were in Antar’s. Here, though, in contrast to Antar the warrior is strong for the sake of Islam, not for his own glorification. The poet readily shows his heroes inability to put his own bowels back in, and the value of receiving support from fellow Muslims. The individual no longer has to pronounce his unlimited superiority to everyone, only now to the enemies of the Muslim cause. Muslim writing, then, it can be said, venerates the actions of the whole faith verses its outside enemies, whereas Jahiliyya poets, venerate the actions of one kinsmen group against its foes. This shift from a family identification to a connection through shared faith allowed a super community to be possible by putting cultural value on collaboration between Muslims. The construction of a super community — going above the family relations of the Arab tribes — gave Islam its power.
The shift in values transmitted in the poetry shows the shift of the focus of the reason for fighting between pre and post Muhammad. In pre-Islamic times a warrior was suppose to be self sufficient: able to thwart all on-comers, and die gloriously when his time came because death was inevitable. The shift is slight post Islam: the individual warrior was suppose to be able to challenge all comers, but when he is injured or dies it is permissible because he died in the support of the super community. Freely exhibiting his individual weakness because it highlighted the strength of the community as a whole. This shift unified the Arab peoples. The unity that Islam provided gave the Arab people an ability to organize more people than Jahiliyya Arabs could.

O Arabs! God has favored you with Islam and has honored you with Muhammad; may God pray for him and grant him peace! By the grace of God you have become brethren. Your call is one and you are united. [All this happened] after you had been attacking each other like lions and violently abducting each other like wolves. Help God, so that he may help you!
[The History of al-Tabari, 111]

Lost Boys Music

For more excellent music by the Jolwolieech look at their band page on Facebook