Sudan is not voting but the international community surely is. This at least is the impression one gets reading the international news coverage of the vote in Sudan. Simon Tisdall, in a piece published Friday in the Guardian argued against 'rubbishing' the process, admitting however to its logic, namely 'democratic' delivery of the South to the SPLM and the North to the NCP, although not bothered by it.
The broad line is, the international community, the 750 plus international observers included, seem to be satisfied, rather outright supportive, of submitting to the autocratic rationale of delivering the country to the interests of two miltary regimes, without consideration whatsoever to the will of a dienfranchised population. The elections, as they run, simply provide an 'international' stamp of attestation to camouflaged dictatorship(s), similar to the costly recognition of academic certificates by foreign embassies.
The scare however goes beyond the problem of democratic legitimacy. Implied in this attestation is signature of Sudan's partition into two, if not several Sudans. According to the long buried CPA, overruled by Grationate designs, Sudan's unity was an objective to be attained. In CPA jargon the Government of National Unity (GoNU) shoulders the duty of 'making unity attractive'. Well it failed to do so!
The alternative to the GoNU by the gun was supposed to be an elected GoNU representing popular will. One capable by virtue of popular support to address Sudan's intractable conflicts, and by implication to address the question of unity in earnest. This alternative has been aborted in favour of wider geopolitical concerns, and with it the prospect of the Sudanese taking things in their hands and deciding on their future. Uncontested as they stand, the SPLM and the NCP will not lose in these elections, win they must. The Sudanese however lose all but their chains, these remain put, with greetings from Gration!