The Face of Truth | Dr. Ibrahim Shaglawi Sudan… Security After the Shock

The return of the Sudan Center for Counterterrorism Studies to work in Khartoum represents an important step toward restoring national expertise in risk assessment and security decision-making. On Thursday, Lieutenant General Hanafi Abdullah, the Center’s Director General, revealed that efforts to develop Sudan’s counterterrorism strategy were accelerating, while Major General Issa Adam Abkar presented a vision document for national reconstruction, addressing strategic challenges and priority decisions.

However, the significance of these developments goes beyond preparing documents; it extends to building national capacity to address interconnected threats, ranging from terrorism and organized crime to cross-border activities. This calls for an approach that links knowledge to decision-making and shifts state institutions from responding to risks to anticipating them, thereby strengthening national security and turning plans into effective instruments.

The challenge, however, is certainly not how quickly the strategy is prepared, but its ability to penetrate the roots of threats and identify the vulnerabilities that allow them to grow. Terrorism cannot be confronted by security agencies alone; rather, it requires the integration of security, justice, education, media, and social policies within clearly defined responsibilities. A state that waits for danger before confronting it remains captive to reactive responses, while a state that understands its causes and dries up its sources takes the initiative in protecting its security.

The value of the Center’s return will be measured by what it achieves on the ground, namely, its ability to translate vision into implementable policies. Here, I believe that the media should not remain on the margins of the strategy but should instead be at its core. The fight against terrorism takes place not only in the security arena but also in public awareness, where trust is built or an environment of misinformation and incitement expands. Without responsible discourse that engages society and understands its concerns, the response will remain incomplete, regardless of the efficiency of security agencies.

The war has revealed that possessing weapons does not necessarily mean possessing security, and that a state unable to protect its borders and preserve social cohesion becomes vulnerable to incursions that extend beyond the military arena into the economy, politics, and public awareness. Therefore, the question that should occupy Sudan today is not how to recover the security and peace it has lost, but how to prevent the conditions that led to their loss from being reproduced.

The war, with its legacy of widespread weapons proliferation, disrupted border control, declining public services, and acute social polarization, has made the concept of counterterrorism more complex. This environment may create opportunities for extremist networks, organized crime, and the illicit financing of activities, but it does not mean that every manifestation of disorder constitutes terrorism, nor that every political disagreement represents a security threat.

This highlights the need for precise legal definitions of terrorism, extremism, organized crime, and legitimate political activity. Confusing these categories does not merely waste resources and undermine trust; it may also lead to violations of rights and the expansion of grievances, thereby fueling the causes of security threats rather than containing them.

In my view, counterterrorism begins with the state’s responsibility to secure borders, strengthen intelligence, cut off funding and recruitment, enforce the law, and protect rights. The roles of religious, educational, media, and community institutions complement this responsibility without replacing it. The state cannot ask society to safeguard security before it has completed the task of building institutions capable of protecting it.

Sustainable security is achieved when the state restores its role in delivering justice, providing services and education, and creating opportunities for a dignified life. These are not demands to be postponed until security is achieved; they are among its foundations. Regional and international cooperation is also essential in confronting cross-border threats, provided that it helps Sudan protect its security without compromising its sovereignty or imposing priorities that do not arise from its national interests.

According to #The_Face_of_Truth, security after the shock means building a state that does not merely confront threats internally, but also possesses the capacity to cooperate regionally and internationally in addressing cross-border risks without compromising its sovereignty. The success of the national counterterrorism strategy depends on linking security with justice and development, addressing the roots of structural weaknesses, and integrating national efforts with regional and international cooperation. Sustainable security is not created by force alone, but by an effective state, a resilient society, and productive partnerships that respect national interests and sovereignty.

Wishing you continued well-being and good health.

Monday, 19 October 2026

Shglawi55@gmail.com