War and Slavery in Sudan. Jok Madut Jok
and the slave trade stand out; I will outline them here.
The Racial Structure of Sudanese Society
Although race in Sudan is a very slippery subject in terms of its biological expression in the population, it matters a great deal in the way people relate to one another. In terms of skin color, which is perhaps one of the most obvious characteristics for lay classification of races, an outsider may regard all Sudanese as black. But as far as the social construction of race is concerned, North Sudanese regard themselves as Arabs, whereas South Sudanese identify themselves as predominantly African, or rather call themselves by the specific ethnic groups to which they belong. These defined racial identities, the history and evolution of which will be explained below, do not stop at that. They evoke emotions of superiority of one group over the other. Sudanese society has become terribly polarized along these perceived racial lines as each group is engaged in either proving the superiority of its culture or disproving the allegations of inferiority made against it. The violent enslavement of Southerners is a result of enslaving communities having developed a racist ideology which ascribes subhuman status to the enslaved communities. The perpetrators of slavery in Sudan, the Baggara Arab herdsmen, use this racial ideology to generate enthusiasm among the young: when a call for raiding is made, they race to the front to prove their assumed superiority. One of the notions used to promote slavery has been the alleged natural inability of the Dinka to confront the more intelligent and militarily agile Baggara. The two main sections of the Baggara, the Rezeigat in Darfur and the Misseria in Kordofan, have both attempted to assert their assumed superior cultural capacities to justify slave raiding. These two Baggara tribes are Arabic-speaking Muslims. The victims of Sudan’s slavery are black Africans, mainly from the Dinka sections of Malwal, Ngok, and Tuic, who are non-Muslim and speak a Nilotic language, using Arabic only as a second language, if at all.
In a cover story in the South African Mail and Guardian, the respected journalist Cameron Duodo characterized Sudan’s tragic years as follows: “The conflict is both of a racial nature and a religious one, between the Arabised black-skinned north and the negroid-Africans, Christians and animists, called by the Muslims the ‘abids’, which means ‘slaves.’”12 A mention of Islam or imposition of Arab culture as important factors in the North-South strife in Sudan frequently arouses discord with non-Sudanese Muslims and Arabs. They often express unease about this supposedly unfair characterization of Islam and Arabs as violent and intolerant. In this fashion, Muslim writer Khadija Magardie responded to Duodo’s article with anger for having suggested that culture and religion have a hand in the Sudan’s war. She demonstrated such utter ignorance about Sudan that her readers must have wondered whether she has ever seen a Baggara person. She suggested “the ‘Arab versus blacks’ framework [used by Duodo], is questionable since anyone who has visited Sudan and knows Sudanese history will know that the Baggara tribal militias, to whom slave-raiding is attributed, are physically identical to the Black southerners.”13 Well, obviously, if we go by the biological classification of races, the distinction between Baggara and Dinka may be somewhat blurred, given that the Baggara carry African blood and no longer look like the Arabs of Arabia or North Africa. But if race is socially constructed as it is in Sudan and elsewhere, Magardie could not be more wrong. Dinka and Baggara see each other as unequal and make no apologies for maintaining such views about one another. When a Dinka person sees a Baggara attacker on horseback, he/she knows the attacker is an Arab. For Sudanese, race is as plain as the different shades of blackness. If outsiders want to ignore the characteristics that the Sudanese themselves see as suggestive of racial differences, so much the better for the future of Sudan. However, race in Sudan is not necessarily based on appearance alone, but also on people’s own racial categorization of themselves. The North Sudanese provide a strong example for the social and cultural construction of race. Now the distinction between Arabs and non-Arabs in Sudan, whether culturally determined or biologically expressed, is as obvious as the colors on the Sudan’s flag.14
The Baggara and the Dinka, therefore, have significant ideological and cultural differences. The differences are at the levels of race, language, religion, and other cultural patterns. But despite these differences, the two people have similarities in their economic activities. Both groups are cattle-herding people, and share borders where they graze and seek water for their livestock. The main resource they share is the grazing plains of a river called the Kiir by the Dinka and Baḥr al-’Arab by the Baggara. Recurrent scarcity of pastures due to droughts has historically led to disputes over pastures and land. For example, northern Darfur and northern Kordofan in the 1970s experienced a period of drought and famine which drove Rezeigat and Misseria cattle keepers farther south in search of grazing areas. When the Dinka resisted them, hostilities ensued and the Khartoum government was quick to back the Baggara using the ideology of racial superiority.
Nioltics’ and Arabs’ Views of One Another
Perhaps the most common view held by the Baggara, about Southerners in general and Nilotics in particular, is that the latter are naturally slaves. In the summer of 1999, Baggara chiefs and militia leaders stated that their strife with the Dinka was a result of the bad nature of the Dinka. The statement explained that Dinka insistence on controlling the grazing plains of the Kiir River was due to the cultural problems among the Dinka which prohibit progress. This statement also suggested possible ways to deal with the Dinka, including raiding them as usual. They also demanded that the government train and arm the Baggara if efforts at Arabicizing the Dinka were to succeed.
In their colloquial language, Arabic groups in the North always use the word abd (slave) to refer to a person of a certain low social class. It is also used to describe the obscene, a person lacking in moral stature, and even the physical appearance of a filthy person. Over time this term has become associated with poverty and only with certain groups within Sudan. At present, it is hurled principally at South Sudanese and the Nuba, particularly because the majority of migrants from the South and the Nuba Mountains now living in the North are comparatively poor. They are less educated, perform demeaning jobs, and adhere to non-Muslim faiths, all of which are reflected in the term abd. These varied uses of the word suggest that they go hand in hand with the roles and status of slaves, and since Southerners and the Nuba have historically been the slaves, the phrase has stuck with them.
This is why slavery in Sudan is not a mere accident of war, but rather a practice deeply embedded in North Sudan. The war has provided only a stimulus and a pretext for something the North has long desired. Conversely, slavery in Sudan could be perceived as cumulative in its effect. Even if one were to make an argument that Sudanese slavery is a product of war, the war itself is a result of degrading views that Northerners hold of Southerners, and these views are responsible for slavery. I do not want to reduce the tragic experience of slavery to the mere use of a word, but the Arab notion that Southerners are people who are naturally slaves goes beyond demeaning terms. Many North Sudanese government officials and lay persons act out their beliefs in many areas of life such as allocation of jobs, distribution of public services, and the language used in their daily interaction with Southerners.
The reverse is also true to a certain degree: the Dinka do not hold favorable views of Northerners. The difference, however, is that southern views of Northerners do not emanate from the perspective of superiority. Most people in the South acknowledge that their cultures are different and that is the end of it. There is no indication that Southerners at any point in history have tried to change the North on account of southern cultures being superior. The South has always been on the defensive against Northerners’ efforts to become overlords in the whole country. The two wars between North and South speak for the southern rejection of Northern culture. The Dinka have cited their notions about Arab culture and Islam as one of the reasons for their vigorous opposition to the encroachment of northern cultures in the South. For example, in an interview in Nyamlel in 1998, one Dinka spiritual leader and community elder was asked to explain from the Dinka vantage point why the Arabs attack them. He characterized the Baggara as follows:
No amount of things, hard work, courtesy, or generosity of heart could one ever give the Baggara that can please them. We allow them to graze in our areas during the dry season, but when the rains begin, they do not just take their herds and go. Instead, they would look for a pretext to fight with us in hope of seizing our cattle. They do not take a moment to think about