The light presents Hamad in his book. «Egyptian domination over the Sudan, last advice before swallowing.» Political and intellectual work beyond the traditional sphere of Sudanese-Egyptian relations.
The book not only makes direct political accusations, but attempts to dismantle the psychological, cultural and historical structure within which this relationship has been formed over decades.
What characterizes this work is not only the boldness of the subordination, but the way the light is written, is that it does not deal with dominance as a transitory political event, but as an extended mental and cultural structure.
So his language comes with vocal vocabulary, like, "the sense of absolute entitlement, the mentality of possession of the pandemic," and "the mental and psychological loss."
This language shifts the debate from just a description of political interference to an attempt to understand how dependency within the Sudanese mind itself is shaped.
It's not only lightning, it's not just condemning the outside, it's hard cash for the Sudanese elite itself.
That is why Sudanese writers hold themselves historically responsible for the fragility of the State and the weakness of national will, before moving to criticism of the Egyptian role in investing that weakness.
This strategy gives the book a clear puzzle force, because it does not speak from the entire innocent victim ' s location, but also from the site of self-review, and hence the language of the book appears to be closer to an internal exhaustion letter from it to just political opponents with Egypt.
Light Hamad also relies on the combination of personal narrative, historical documentation and factual data; in some places, individual certificates and experiences are needed, and in other places, historical documents, statistics and figures on the economy, resources and political relations are used.
This correlation between testimony and analysis gives the text a probative nature and sometimes makes it closer to political investigation than to cold academic writing.
One of the most important features of the book is its reliance on the language of warning and warning.
Even the titles of the same chapters reveal this trend.
Valnor Hamad writes like the Sudan stands in front of a critical historic moment, as if time is already running out.
This sense of risk gives the text a clear dramatic tension, but at the same time it may push some readers to consider the book as closer to intellectual mobilization from it to neutral analysis.
An important point in the book is its repeated criticism of the Sudanese elite, sects and political forces, including Muslims, traditional parties and the military establishment.
The writer considers that the crisis in the Sudan is not only in external interventions, but in the internal structure that has reproduces dependence, weakness and division, and therefore self-criticism appears to be an essential part of his intellectual project, not merely an ethical margin added to the text.
Light Hamad is also good at employing shocking paradoxes that have a direct impact on the reader, such as his speaking of Egypt ' s export of the Arab capital, although the Sudan is the primary producer, or his talk of controlling resources and reorienting the Sudanese economy to serve external interests.
These paradoxes give the book a high rhetoric energy, and make it more close to the "inquisition" style than traditional political writing.
At the construction level, the book moves on an upward and deliberate basis; it begins with identity and culture issues, then moves to the revolution, army and Muslims, before it reaches the economy, resources and displacement, and ends with the question of State, sovereignty and national independence.
This gradient gives work a clear cohesiveness and turns reading into an escalating path from diagnosis to conviction.
And despite the power of the book, some weaknesses remain.
In some places, shocking curses and emotional language may exaggerate the reader looking for a more refreshing and neutral analysis, and the emphasis on internal collusion may sometimes seem to ease the responsibility of the external factors themselves.
These observations, however, do not detract from the intellectual value of work, to the extent that it reveals its nature as a precautionary speech that seeks to raise Sudanese awareness more than to produce a neutral academic study.
Ultimately, Light Hamad does not write from the position of the neutral researcher, but from the position of the thinker concerned with the question of Sudanese independence and the meaning of national sovereignty.
His book cannot therefore be dealt with as a mere transitory political pamphlet, but as an attempt to dismantle the relationship between the Sudan and Egypt through a radical review of history, politics and national awareness.
Whether the reader agrees with or disagrees with the Noor Hamad, the book imposes a difficult question from which it cannot escape: has the Sudan failed to protect its borders only, or has it first failed to protect its national consciousness?
zuhair.osman@aol.com
