Photo by Elize Bezuidenhout on Unsplash
In the last days of August, Sudan’s two rival governments both held cabinet meetings which, in their different symbolisms, reflected very different visions for the future of their benighted country. Those different visions were best captured in the redesigned state coat of arms that hung on the wall behind Rapid Support Forces commander General Mohamed Dagalo, known as Hemdeti, as he presided over the first meeting of his new cabinet.
The existing coat of arms, in use by the Sudanese Armed Forces, features a secretary bird, an indigenous variant of the Eagle of Saladin and the Hawk of Quraish, both strongly Islamic and references with a shield from the time of Muhammad Ahmad, the self-proclaimed Mahdi who briefly ruled Sudan in the 19th century. Above and below are two scrolls, the upper one displaying the national motto, in Arabic, Victory is ours, while the lower one says Republic of the Sudan. It’s worth noting that Sudan took the word ‘Democratic’ out of its state name…
In the RSF-Tasis coat of arms, displayed at Dagalo’s cabinet meeting in Nyala, capital of South Darfur on 30 August , Sudan’s secretary bird remains. But the name of the state has been moved to the upper scroll, and the lower scroll features the words ‘Freedom, Justice, Equality’, and eight stars have been added, denoting the regions.
Three days earlier, General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan’s cabinet had met under its prime minister, Kamil Idris, in Port Sudan. Idris promised an inclusive Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue that excludes no one, a routine formulation that contradicts his other proposition that first the ‘rebellion’ has to be ‘eliminated’. He expects, in other words, that the SAF’s adversaries must either surrender or be defeated before what is left of them can be invited to peace talks, hardly the most enticing of invitations to them.
The SAF cabinet meeting had followed General Burhan’s sweeping military reorganisation, retiring officers with ties to Islamist movements, particularly those linked to the National Congress Party (NCP) of former dictator Omar al-Bashir. This reshuffle was seen as an effort to appease international partners, particularly the United States and Egypt—both have expressed concerns about Islamist influence within the SAF.
The SAF nonetheless remains deeply divided over Islam’s role in governance. Despite removing some Islamist-linked officers, Burhan has simultaneously brought various armed groups under direct SAF command, including the 20,000-strong Al Baraa Bin Malik Brigade, an explicitly Islamist formation. While Burhan attempts to distance himself from overt Islamist politics to maintain international support, he cannot entirely abandon these forces due to their significant military contribution. This tension reflects what observers describe as the SAF’s inability to definitively break from its Islamist heritage while pursuing a more internationally acceptable image, and recognition of its legitimacy, through secular reforms.
The RSF’s new coats of arms and notably the words Freedom, Justice Equality suggest something different. Arguably these are just words, even the most tyrannical of states bandy such words about with little regard for their actual meaning, but the RSF’s constitutional framework does provide some insight into their vision: its transitional constitution, signed six months ago, speaks of a secular, democratic, decentralised state based on freedom, equality, and justice, without bias toward any cultural, ethnic, religious, or regional identity.
As for those eight stars, the RSF constitution restructures Sudan into eight federal regions with significant autonomous powers, including the right to self-determination if central authorities fail to maintain separation of religion and state. This federal structure directly challenges the centralised Arab-Islamic state model that has dominated Sudan since independence. It also calls for the dissolution of militias linked to the NCP and Islamic Movement, a direct challenge to power structures that have dominated Sudan for decades, offering an alternative to populations frustrated with decades of Islamist rule.
What’s in a logo, one might ask? Quite a bit, apparently. There are no angels in this conflict, both sides have much to answer for. But were one to ask the people of Sudan what they would choose, after those decades of Islamist rule, which have brought little but oppression, hunger, extreme ethnic violence, and the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives they might well reply, “Let us live and let live.” A secular, democratic republic would seem to be an important part of how that might be possible.
