Khartoum, (Nabaa Sudan) – On a busy street in Khartoum, citizens do not begin their questions about Sudan’s dialogue with the shape of the next government or the distribution of political positions. One man is watching the price of a commodity that has risen, a family is waiting for a service that has been disrupted to return, a student is trying to reclaim his university place after years of war, and a displaced person is thinking about returning home. They are all united by one question: What will the dialogue change in our lives?
This is where the dialogue process enters a different phase—from introducing the idea to seeking to make citizens a part of it, rather than merely recipients of its outcomes.
The Citizen’s Voice
Yasir Abbas, an employee, sums up the issue with a direct question: “What can the dialogue change in reality?”
For him, it is not enough for citizens to know that a dialogue is taking place or to follow meetings being held in their name. What matters is knowing how it will affect security, the economy, education and services.
The citizen who has lost his home wants the effects of the war addressed; the person who has lost his source of income wants a path back to work; and the student wants stable education. Therefore, confidence in the dialogue begins when its potential outcomes are transformed into answers that can be seen in daily life.
Listening First
Dr. Omar Al-Khair, Director of the Center for Democracy, believes the starting point should not be asking citizens to be convinced by the dialogue, but rather understanding what they want from it.
In his view, citizens follow political forces but do not always see themselves as part of the process. He therefore proposes creating direct spaces for engagement with citizens to understand their views and the issues they want to see placed at the forefront of the dialogue.
Here, trade unions, universities, grassroots communities and the media have a role to play—not in repeating ready-made political narratives, but in bringing citizens’ questions to the dialogue table.
Reaching the People
Al-Amin Ibrahim Al-Amin, chieftain of Al-Rufaeen Al-Azuzab Al-Tis’een Al-Gawasim tribal administration, places native administration at the heart of the task of reaching local communities. Its direct connection with people, in his view, makes it possible to simplify the idea of dialogue, open discussion around it and contribute to addressing the effects of social division.
But a citizen who has been displaced or sought refuge, or who lives in an area that is difficult to reach, will not wait in a dialogue hall. Reaching people where they are therefore becomes part of the process itself.
Al-Amin believes society already has much to put forward: the experiences and fears of war, its interests and its questions about the state it wants. What is needed is for these voices to find their way onto the dialogue agenda.
From Listener to Influencer
Dr. Majd-Eddin Al-Sheikh Al-Ahmadi Al-Shinawi, Deputy Chairman of the Sudan Justice Alliance (Origin) and Chairman of the National Sufi Body in Sudan, takes the question a step further: Can citizens influence the outcome of the dialogue?
In his view, participation should not stop at listening to the discourse. Citizens can influence the priorities of political forces when their demands become clear and are heard.
This highlights the importance of universities, forums, religious and social institutions, and trade unions as spaces for discussion, so that citizens do not remain outside the process of setting priorities.
Education Speaks
At Sudan University of Science and Technology, the issue takes another form. The university’s Assistant Registrar, Afraa Hashim Abdel-Latif, speaks of the continuation of education during the war through in-person and online learning, as well as the organization of examinations for students inside and outside Sudan.
She links the post-war phase to retaining students, academics and professional cadres, and calls on Sudanese at home and abroad to contribute to reconstruction and to fostering a culture of dialogue and peace.
For the student, she says, dialogue is inseparable from the future: Will the student return to a stable university? And after graduation, will they find a state capable of absorbing their expertise?
Expanding Participation
Dr. Mohamed Ahmed Al-Jaali, a leading figure in the Democratic Unionist Party, raises a different question: Who participates in the dialogue?
He believes excluding political and societal forces threatens the process, and that citizens’ issues must be at its heart rather than remaining confined to politicians.
Al-Jaali advocates holding public seminars and lectures at universities and schools, expanding participation to include various sectors of society, and drawing on previous agreements and frameworks, including the Jeddah Agreement.
He also stresses the importance of broadening representation on the current committee to include different groups and sectors.
The Real Test
Ultimately, citizens need more than general promises. They need specific answers: When will security return? How will services be restored? What about education and employment? What will happen to the displaced? And, most importantly, will they have a voice in shaping the answers?
The statements of those interviewed converge on four points: reaching citizens where they are; listening to their demands before addressing them; broadening participation through society, universities and native administrations; and turning the dialogue’s outcomes into issues that citizens can follow up on and hold officials accountable for.
According to the sources, that is when dialogue becomes more than meetings and statements for citizens; it becomes a path through which they can see something of the life that lies ahead.
Sudan #Nabaa_Sudan #Nabaa
