I’ve been reading the news coming out of Southern Sudan with a great deal of trepidation. I’m categorically not against the referendum and the potential split of Africa’s largest country. For me, the distressing thing is the level of hyperbole and un-moderated excitement of various voices in Africa and further afield. Reading headlines like ‘Countdown begins to a free Southern Sudan’ doesn’t make me want to celebrate. Instead it takes me back to a very scary place, sitting in my living room in Nairobi in 2007, waiting for election results to be released by the Electoral Council of Kenya.

Although the 2007 election will be known in history as the one that threatened to tear the country apart, anyone who was in Kenya at the time will tell you that the days before the vote were some of the most inspiring in the country’s history. On the day of the vote, we watched with great pride as queues of excited but patient Kenyans snaked their way around and around the polling stations, some people waiting for up to five hours to vote. Never in the country’s history had a voting process been so smooth - it was the beginning of a new democratic era.

We all know how that particular scenario turned out, and the current excitement in Southern Sudan takes me back there, but not in a good way. Of course there’s no real reason to believe that the referendum in Southern Sudan will turn out the same as the election in Kenya. The populations in both countries have had completely different historical trajectories, and more importantly were voting for different things. Whereas the referendum in Southern Sudan is very much a life or death issue, perhaps signalling an end to the country’s protracted conflict, except for corrupt and greedy politicians who look to elected office as a ticket to prosperity rather than a chance to serve the public, the election in Kenya was more an issue of cementing the political change that had taken root in 2002. Southern Sudan is voting for it’s right to exist beyond the shadow of the North, Kenya was voting for the right to the label ‘democratic republic’.

Yet, there is something eerily familiar about the rhetoric surrounding the Sudanese vote. Without a doubt, this is a historical moment, for Sudan and for the region, but the coverage by African media and outlets further afield seems to be based on the assumption that because Omar al Bashir has stated publicly that he will abide by the decision of the Southern Sudanese people, not only will he be bound by these statements, but all the people who for over 40 years have kept one of the world’s longest conflicts going will play along.

It is encouraging that Africa is getting such significant ‘airtime’, particularly in the Western media, but it seems we’ve forgotten that Bashir has been president of both Southern Sudan and Darfur, in charge during some of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, and the chilling outcome of the sinister machinations of the central administration and their lackeys in the latter case does not bear repeating.

Don’t misunderstand. This isn’t a bout of Afro-pessimism condemning a promising moment in history to failure before it even transpires. Rather, it is a call for moderation and self-reflection, particularly on the part of the media and those who are able to use it as a platform for their agendas. It is important and indeed necessary for the people of Sudan and their friends to will their nation into existence as peacefully as is possible. However, it is equally important for any expectations to be grounded in the reality that even by the most generous standards, the Northern government has not really earned a reputation for playing fair. Would it be so unusual for ballot boxes to be stuffed and officials to be intimidated as they were in Kenya, in full view of international observers and the hawk-eyed press? What if, even outside all the hype and excitement playing out in the press, the majority of Southern Sudanese, like their former leader the late John Garang, are actually against separation from the North? Why are we all talking like the result of the vote is a given - is there a plan for what would happen if the result didn’t quite go as we have all set them up to go?

Unless there is some agreement that we as the public are not privy to - and let’s face it, in any African election this is hardly the stuff of dreams - caution should be the order of the day when reporting on the referendum. It may very well be that Bashir and his circle, like their counterparts in the South, have grown weary of living in perpetual conflict and are equally eager for a peaceful settlement, and we are on the cusp of Africa’s Velvet Revolution. Still, considering the country’s history, until any such hopes materialise and Southern Sudan comes out of this week intact and free, we must keep our expectations in check and judge the key players by what they do rather than what they promise to do. If there is anything that we should all have learnt this weekend following the tragic events in Arizona, USA, is that the consequences of political rhetoric can be devastating and far-reaching.

We as Africans must be hopeful but we must not allow our hope to blind us to the recurrent shortcomings of our beloved continent. It’s time we learned to give trust where it is earned rather than continually letting our leaders kick us in the teeth. Dickens accurately observed that the pressure of unmet expectation can sometimes have devastating outcomes. While wishing nothing but the best for our Southern Sudanese brothers, I hope that they are spared the experience of frustrated men threatening to tear their country apart.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Please send comments to [email protected] or
comment online at Pambazuka News.