http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/04/13/world/international-uk-sudan-elections-divide.html
As voting began Sunday in Sudan, a nation rich with oil divided along ethnic, credal and sectarian lines, little hope resounded that elections (the first in 24 years) would bring much substantive change.
Last hopes of any real referendum were ’snuffed out’ when Yasir Arman, leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SLPM) announced at the last moment that his party would not participate in elections. SLPM cites widespread vote rigging as the key motivator for withdrawal, and numerous international election monitering agencies concur.
Even without voter maninpulation and ballot fraud, current Sudanese President Omar Hasaan al-Bashir of the National Congress Party (NCP) may well be the victor. As economic conditions in Sudan worsen, the burden of scratching out subsistence, coupled with an ingrained cynicism in the abilities of Sudan’s autocratic regime have left little enthusiasm for opposition movements.
“Most of the people are not voting here. Everyone is too busy chasing a living. Everyone knows it is a closed race for the NCP,” a resident of Khartoum commented.
As numerous Sudanese were questioned, a majority responded “Bukra (tomorrow)” when asked if they had voted.
While on a practical level, many laborers found scheduling time to vote during the work week difficult, more potent issues lie behind voter disenchantment, according to experts on the region.
While Khartoum, Sudan’s capital, is highly developed and the center of Sudanese wealth, little economic growth is enjoyed by other regions. This economic disparity alone, disregarding issues of sectionalism and ethno-centric conflict, is seen as enough to create major unrest and disatisfaction.
Confusion also plagued voters in various polling stations accross the country, where station workers reported low turnout.
Rumors and electoral misinformation persisted throughout the country. While Yasir Arman had withdrawn, a vote for fellow SPLM candidate Salva Kiir would have the same effect, many reported. In reality, Kiir is seeking the Presidency of South Sudan only, and his name appeared only on regional ballots.
With the prospects of a fair referendum long out of view, much pressure falls upon the shoulders of the opposition. What role should opposition leaders play in elections clearly deemed fraudulent? Two schools of thought persist: one advocates withdrawal while the other insists that a continued campaign is more effective, as it highlights government corruption and dishonesty. The second of these two doctrines seems to be both more effective and more ethical. Benazir Bhutto, Pakistani opposition leader and frequent (losing) participant in rigged elections, supported this ideology. By not withdrawing “you are not giving the government tools against you; they cannot claim you are not cooperating. As you campaign, you capture the hearts of the people, and when you lose it is a people’s loss. Going through the motions [of an obviously rigged election] might be exhausting, but withdrawal shows no faith in the future of people.”
With this in mind, what message is the SPLM sending to Sudan by withdrawing?
