khalid

When the #MuslimBrotherhood regime came to power in #Sudan through a military coup, I was a 10 years old child. When it fell, I had become a grey-haired man. It is therefore ironic that someone from outside Sudan, who has not lived this experience, would try to lecture me on whether or not the Sudanese Islamic Movement is terrorist. Mr. Cameron Hudson knows this movement’s record very well. But as someone acting in support of the Sudanese military authority, he chooses to cover up their crimes and deliberately mislead global public opinion by obscuring the realities of the war in Sudan. Hudson knows that the force which seized power through a military coup, infiltrated the army, operated ‘Ghost Houses’ to torture opponents, targeted women and religious minorities, and committed the two gravest crimes against Sudan—genocide in Darfur in 2003 and the division of the country in 2011—is the Sudanese Islamic Movement, and no other. He knows that the Islamic Movement threatened international peace and even targeted the United States by hosting terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Islamic Jihad groups. As a result, the U.S. designated Sudan a state sponsor of terrorism in 1993. That same environment later enabled Al-Qaeda to plan and carry out attacks including the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, the 2000 USS Cole attack, and ultimately the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This pattern has not ended: in 2023, the US imposed sanctions on senior Islamist figure “Abdelbasit Hamza” for terrorism financing. The RSF committed horrific crimes that deserve condemnation and the harshest punishment for what they inflicted on Sudanese people. Yet Mr. Hudson tries to conceal the fact that this very Islamic Movement is the one that created the RSF in the first place—armed it, trained it, legalized its existence by law, and provided it with the space to build a financial power and external relations. In truth, it did not stop there; it created armed groups outside state control both before and after the RSF. Today, you see Port Sudan having created dozens of militias in Darfur, eastern, central, and northern Sudan. Hudson wants to convince us that the biggest problem is the “product” (the RSF), not the factory itself and the main production line (the Islamic Movement). Is there any greater insult to common sense than this? In his response, Hudson warns that sanctions on the Islamists would have dire consequences for ordinary Sudanese, citing potential harm to humanitarian aid and state institutions. In doing so, he confirms what we have long argued: that this terrorist movement has hijacked the Sudanese state and weaponized access to food and aid. Yet the solution Hudson offers is effectively to surrender to terrorism and refrain from confronting it for fear of the harm it may cause. Thanks to him, in fact, for reinforcing a truth that others have long sought to obscure by claiming that the Muslim Brotherhood has no influence over the SAF authorities. We reject this logic entirely. Terrorism is not defeated through accommodation or coexistence, but through confrontation and resistance. The Sudanese people have lived for decades under military and Islamist rule and will not accept lectures from anyone urging them to remain trapped in their prisons for decades to come. Hudson advances a misleading approach that portrays Sudanese choices as limited to living under Muslim Brotherhood rule or under the RSF—an outrageously deliberate distortion. We do not see it that way, and we present a clear position that cannot be obscured. We believe Sudan’s future must be civilian and democratic, free from military domination—whether by the army or the RSF—and free from the dominance of extremist groups such as the Islamic Movement. This is a cause we have devoted our entire lives to. Neither imprisonment nor persecution by military or Islamist forces has broken our resolve, and no one will convince us to surrender—now or ever.

Designations of Muslim Brotherhood Chapters state.gov/releases/offic…