The Face of Truth | Ibrahim Shaglawi
Sudan between Podcasts and Al Jazeera Mubasher..!
The national scene in our country lacks the presence of active elites, who seem to be in a state of retreat and confusion, while podcast platforms and Al Jazeera Mubasher dominate the media space with varying content, differing in quality and depth. There is also a clear vacuum resulting from the absence of intellectual and political salons that were once national platforms entrusted with directing public opinion and formulating enlightened and insightful visions.
In this article, we attempt to discuss these ideas, the crisis of national dialogue in Sudan, the history of political salons, and propose a roadmap to rebuild the public space away from polarization and the noise of slogans.
It is important to remind that these platforms are not a product of the last decade, but their roots go back to before independence in 1956, where intellectual salons represented an authentic tradition in Sudanese political life. Such spaces existed since the 1950s, hosting discussions about independence, democracy, and national sovereignty, and accompanying the major political transformations in the country. They formed the basic building blocks in shaping the public consciousness of Sudanese citizens.
These platforms today have either disappeared or been sidelined, leaving a large void in the space of national dialogue. This has been replaced by alternative platforms, the most notable of which is the podcast, which, despite offering an important narrative space, often lacks analytical depth and focuses more on recounting history rather than analyzing the current political moment and its structural complexities. This reduces its ability to influence public opinion or produce political approaches that address the roots of the national crisis.
Similarly, Al Jazeera Mubasher, despite its serious attempts to open windows for Sudanese discussions during critical events, its editorial policies, time limitations, guest selection, and the pre-prepared questions for the interviews, all limit its effectiveness in reaching understandings or producing approaches among the parties. The control over the structure of discussions, time, and content makes it difficult for these programs to play the role of free national platforms.
Today, Sudan stands at a crossroads, amidst an existential war and a zero-sum conflict between components of the political elite, characterized by superficiality and entrenched positions behind empty slogans with no clear horizon or unifying national project. In such critical moments, the need to revive platforms born from the womb of a vigilant national mind, away from polarization and exclusionary visions, becomes even more urgent.
For example, there are many crucial issues that require Sudanese elites, whether inside or in the diaspora, and political actors, to develop clear and coherent visions. One of the most prominent of these issues is the stance of Sudanese parties towards the “international quartet,” which represents a temporary alliance driven by interests and has increasingly become a pressure group with growing influence on the course of the Sudanese crisis, both politically and humanitarianly.
Holding such discussions has become a national necessity. The goal is not just to manage the differences, but to establish new rational approaches that lead to realistic solutions reflecting the aspirations of the Sudanese people and breaking the current political and national impasse.
Sudan has experienced examples of forums that embodied this role, such as the “Kabaya Shai” forum of Al-Tayar newspaper, the salon of General Abdullah Safi Al-Nur, the Taiba Press Forum, and the Anqara platform. These national experiments brought together elites, media, and public opinion, contributing to the establishment of a culture of dialogue. In the “Al-Tayar” forum, bold questions were posed to the British ambassador in 2018 about Sudan’s relations with Britain, which reflects the boldness of national platforms when they are free and responsible.
As for the Safi Al-Nur Salon, it was an exceptional intellectual crucible that gathered minds from different political currents and created a weekly environment for collective thinking on the country’s issues. Meanwhile, the Prince Jamal Anqara Salon maintained its continuity and influence in supporting the causes of journalists and opinion leaders, and reinforced national unity.
The absence of these platforms does not only indicate a decline in political awareness, but also reveals the fragility of the alternatives that have replaced them. Podcasts, despite some good experiments, are still incapable of performing the vital role that traditional forums played, due to their lack of openness to influential elites and their reliance on documentary narration rather than structural analysis. The same applies to Al Jazeera Mubasher’s dialogues, which remain bound by the institution’s controls rather than a space of freedoms.
Therefore, the return of effective and influential national forums to the Sudanese scene is considered a political and intellectual necessity. Sudanese elites, when given the space and support, have the ability to produce mature initiatives that address the issues of war and peace, social fabric, and national recovery.
According to #The_Face_of_Truth, Sudan will not emerge from its crises except through serious national dialogue that starts from these free spaces, which ensure the restoration of the public space as a common ground for thinking, planning, and shaping the future, away from noise and alignments. When we restore the word to its place and give dialogue its dignity, we will have taken the first steps toward recovery, towards a state founded on pluralism, justice, and citizenship.
Wishing you health and wellness.
Sunday, October 12, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com
