By Stephen Zunes who thanks the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict for supporting his research.
When the turbulent and often tragic history of the past decade in the Middle East and North Africa is written, the 2019 pro-democracy revolution in Sudan will likely be considered one of the few bright spots. One of the world’s most brutal dictatorships—in power for over 30 years—was overthrown in a massive nonviolent civil insurrection involving millions of Sudanese, and a liberal technocratic civilian administration put into place. Whether civilian democratic rule will survive the serious challenges still facing the country remains to be seen, but for now a key question is: how did they do it?
One of the world’s most brutal dictatorships was overthrown in a massive nonviolent civil insurrection, and a liberal technocratic civilian administration put into place.
Sudan did not fit into what some Western analysts see as the conditions for a successful pro-democracy civil resistance movement. The regime was thought to be too oppressive, too entrenched, and too successful in their divide-and-rule tactics of the large and ethnically heterogeneous nation. Their reactionary Islamist rule disempowered women. Civil society had been decimated under the three decades of military rule and the Sudanese people were seen as too impoverished, uneducated, and isolated. Over five million of the country’s brightest, most educated, and most ambitious potential leaders had emigrated. Wealthy Gulf monarchies were helping to prop up the military regime. And most of the West had largely written off Sudan as a hopeless case.
Despite this, starting in December 2018, a movement emerged which eventually brought millions of Sudanese into the streets. By April 2019, General Omar al-Bashir was overthrown by fellow military officers. Protests continued and, despite hundreds of additional deaths, by August the military stepped down in favor of a civilian-led transitional government.
The reasons for their success appear to include the following:
There was precedence: Long before the Arab Spring, the Eastern European revolutions, and other popular democratic uprisings which caught the world’s attention, the Sudanese had toppled dictatorships in 1964 and 1985 through massive civil resistance campaigns.
One advantage was that some of the main elements of the repressive apparatus of the regime—the police, intelligence, military, and special forces—were divided, and the opposition did an excellent job of exacerbating those divisions and using them to the movement’s advantage. Another factor was that the African Union and the Europeans were on the movement’s side, thanks in part to efforts of the exile community and others to mobilize their support. An additional factor was that business people, even those who had supported the ruling party, realized that—for the sake of the economy and therefore their own self-interest—they had to end their support for military rule and support democratic governance.
The Sudanese regime was also simply incompetent. The economy was in shambles.
The Sudanese regime was also simply incompetent. The economy was in shambles. Education, transport, health care, agriculture and other basic infrastructure had deteriorated significantly during their three decades in power. They had lost the southern third of the country along with most of the oil reserves when South Sudan became independent in 2011. International sanctions added to chronic corruption and mismanagement in weakening the economy of an already impoverished nation. Despite its brutality, the state was in many respects weak. Young Sudanese had had enough. They felt they had no future and they had nothing more to lose.
More important was what happened on the ground. A critical factor was the scope and the scale of the movement. Unlike some civil insurrections—which were almost exclusively in the capital with mostly middle class support—the Sudanese revolution took place all over country, in all the different regions, with diverse class and ethnic participation. Professional associations played a key leadership role, but popular resistance committees were also active in even the poorest neighborhoods. Indeed, the ability to build such a broad coalition of forces was vitally important, given the size and complexity of the country.
For decades, the regime tried to divide Sudanese by North and South, Arab and non-Arab, Muslim and non-Muslim. The pro-democracy protesters recognized that national unity was critically important and consciously resisted efforts at divide-and-rule.
For example, though historically in the Arab-dominated part of the Sudan, greater Khartoum is a multi-ethnic urban area, as those from minority regions fleeing violence and poverty have flocked to the capital area. When the protests began, the regime tried to blame the uprising on Furs, the people indigenous to the Darfur region who have been subjected to a genocidal campaign by the regime. In response, the largely-Arab but multi-ethnic protesters began chanting “We are all Darfur!” In solidarity, protesters in Al Fashir, the Darfur capital, started chanting “We are all Khartoum!”
Related to this diversity was the strong participation and leadership by women, which not only helped increase the numbers of protesters, but provided a perspective that encouraged nonviolent discipline.
Related to this diversity was the strong participation and leadership by women, which not only helped increase the numbers of protesters, but provided a perspective that encouraged nonviolent discipline, democratic process, greater credibility, and better popular perception of the movement and its goals. Under al-Bashir’s rule, women had been severely repressed in terms of dress codes, employment, and even the ability to leave home without the accompaniment of a close male relative. A frequent theme illustrated in murals, signs, and elsewhere during the revolution involved the Kandaka, a matrilineal dynasty of powerful queens from the first millennium BCE. It served as an inspiration for women and a reminder that the ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam, which severely circumscribed their rights was not inherent to Sudanese history or culture.
Perhaps the single most important factor was nonviolent discipline. Remaining nonviolent despite enormous provocation made it difficult for the regime to depict the movement in a negative light. Nonviolence gained the movement sympathy it would have otherwise lost through violent tactics and made it possible for people to feel more comfortable joining the protests, thereby increasing their numbers.
The opposition stressed the importance of maintaining nonviolent discipline not out of any moral commitment to nonviolence per se, but because of an understanding that tactically and strategically it was the best way they could win. If they had used violence, the regime would always have the advantage. By choosing what amounted to a different weapons system—peaceful protests, sit-tins, strikes, and more—they were unable to depict the protesters as terrorists who would bring violence and chaos.
The Sudanese opposition had engaged in violent struggle previously. Beginning in 1993, operating out of bases in Eritrea, an armed guerrilla movement was launched but it never got far, failing to provoke a more widespread popular uprising. The rebellion formally ended in 2005. Similarly, repression against the civil insurrection of 2013 resulted in many protesters fighting back and was crushed within days after scores of civilian deaths.
Recognizing that both armed struggle and rioting played into the regime’s hands, the opposition recognized that nonviolent discipline was critical.
Recognizing that both armed struggle and rioting played into the regime’s hands, the opposition recognized that nonviolent discipline was critical.
Importantly, the pro-democracy movement did not stop when al-Bashir was pushed aside by the military in April. Unlike in Egypt, where the opposition naively trusted the military, the Sudanese demanded they step down and allow for civilian leadership. A result was the June 3 massacre, causing well over 100 deaths. But this seemed to underscore to the military that they would have to engage in massive violence to suppress the rebellion which would discredit them further and put them in an even more untenable situation.
There is still much to do to consolidate democracy and civilian rule in Sudan. Though civilians dominate the transitional government, the military and other elements of the old guard are still part of the system.
The toppling of al-Bashir and his military backers is still an amazing accomplishment, however. It demonstrates that whatever the structural obstacles may be, good strategic thinking and tenacity by a popular opposition movement can ultimately win. This should be a lesson to those struggling for greater political freedom and social justice through the greater Middle East. Indeed, if an unarmed democratic civil insurrection can succeed in a country like Sudan, it can succeed almost anywhere.
Dr. Stephen Zunes is a Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, where he serves as coordinator of the program in Middle Eastern Studies. Recognized as one the country’s leading scholars of U.S. Middle East policy and of strategic nonviolent action, Professor Zunes serves as a senior policy analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus project of the Institute for Policy Studies, an associate editor of Peace Review, and a contributing editor of Tikkun.
For a quick post about a mural in Sudan thanking Stephen Zunes and NVI's longtime Executive Director Michael Beer, please see: https://www.nonviolenceinternational.net/sudan_mural
Latest posts
The Power of the Powerless:
Nonviolent Resistance Begins with Ordinary Acts
In the midst of cascading global crises - war, repression, climate breakdown, and democratic backsliding, the world briefly paused this week to listen to Canada’s prime minister’s speech at the World Economic Forum, in Davos. Mark Carney opened his speech with an unexpected story: The Power of the Powerless.
The reference comes from a 1978 essay by Czech dissident and playwright Václav Havel, who would later become president of Czechoslovakia. It remains one of the most important texts on authoritarianism and nonviolent resistance. What makes his analysis enduring is not simply its critique of repression, but its clarity in explaining a question many people still struggle to articulate: why do authoritarian systems persist even when few genuinely believe in them? Havel’s answer is both unsettling and empowering: because society participates in the lie, not necessarily out of conviction, but out of habit, fear, and self-preservation.
Authoritarianism is sustained not only by force, but by conformity. Authoritarian regimes are often imagined as systems held together exclusively by violence, and Havel does not deny the role of coercion, but he argues that the more efficient form of control is subtler: fear that becomes routine. Such systems function because millions of ordinary people quietly adjust their behavior to what is expected of them and, over time, this compliance becomes normalized. People learn how to perform loyalty without believing it. In this sense, authoritarian power depends less on ideological devotion and more on daily participation in a collective performance. This is what Havel calls “living within the lie.”
One of the essay’s most famous examples is that of a greengrocer who places a political slogan in his shop window, written “Workers of the world, unite!” The key point is not the slogan itself, but why it is displayed. The greengrocer does not post it because he believes in it. He does so to signal that he understands the rules of the game. The sign becomes a silent message: I am obedient. I will not cause trouble.
Here, Havel exposes a fundamental weakness of authoritarian systems: they rely on these visible rituals of submission. Such gestures reassure the regime and society that everyone is still playing their assigned role. So Havel asks a deceptively simple question: What happens if the greengrocer removes the sign? He does not topple the regime. But some things do change:
- the ritual is broken
- the illusion of consensus cracks
- the system’s dependence on performance becomes visible
And once that happens, others begin to see that the system is not inevitable.
“Living in truth” as Nonviolent Action
For Havel, the real power of the “powerless” lies in choosing to “live in truth.” This is not a moral slogan, but a practical decision to stop reproducing messages one does not believe, to refuse participation in the lie that sustains the system. These acts may appear small. That is precisely why they are powerful. Nonviolent resistance does not always begin with mass protests or dramatic confrontation. Often, it begins with:
- a worker who refuses to repeat propaganda
- a teacher who teaches honestly
- an artist who creates despite censorship
- a journalist who documents reality
- a neighbor who protects another
- a community that organizes itself
To live in truth is a form of nonviolent direct action - one that interrupts automatic obedience. When ordinary people withdraw their participation from the daily theater of obedience, slogans lose their power, fear loses its monopoly, silence no longer signals consent, and truth begins to circulate again. From a nonviolent perspective, political change often emerges not as a clash of force, but as a crisis of obedience.
Why The Power of the Powerless Matters Today
Havel also points toward a strategy deeply aligned with contemporary nonviolent movements: the creation of parallel structures: spaces of social, cultural, and civic life that exist beyond the regime’s control. Rather than waiting for a single moment of rupture, these initiatives build long-term resilience:
- independent cultural spaces
- community networks
- alternative education
- solidarity economies
- independent media
- civil society organizations
Often, repression does not arrive only as open violence, it appears as normalization: cynicism, self-censorship, isolation, and the belief that “nothing can be done.” Havel’s essay offers a crucial reminder:
Power does not reside only at the top.
Power is embedded in daily life.
And so is the possibility of change.
When people choose to live in truth, they create the conditions authoritarian systems fear most: a society that begins to recognize its own agency. Havel shows that obedience has mechanisms. So does resistance.
Nonviolence, in practice, is the collective refusal to sustain a lie as a form of governance.
It is the patient reconstruction of public life through truth, solidarity, and dignity.
History does not change only when people seize institutions. Often, it changes when people decide, together, to stop performing for power.
Dear friend,
This year we invite you to re-read Dr. King’s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, (or you can watch it on here).
“I conclude that this award which I receive on behalf of that movement is a profound recognition that nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time – the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to violence and oppression…. we will know that we are living in the creative turmoil of a genuine civilization struggling to be born…I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction. I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality.”
Despite making much progress in alleviating racism, sexism and reducing global poverty, we see violence and injustice growing in wars and occupations that destroy civilian life, in places like Palestine, Sudan, Western Sahara, Burma, Ukraine, Uganda, and the Congo. The world has surpassed 100 million refugees, as militarism and war have accelerated.
We see governments across the world suppress dissent and weaken human rights in the name of “security.” Racialized police violence continues. Mass incarceration that destroys communities. Economic inequality is growing while basic needs go unmet. Voting rights are under attack. Protest is criminalized. Migrants are treated as threats rather than human beings.
In the United States, the home of Dr. King, the US government is abetting genocide, attacking constitutional and international laws and institutions, and throwing the world over the cliff into climate chaos, all for the sake of transferring vast wealth and power to the few.
Nonviolence International exists because we refuse to accept this as normal.
Nonviolence is harder than violence. We are not going to kill or threaten our way to a just and sustainable future. We must use persuasion, nonviolent coercion, the rule of law, global cooperation and governance in order to survive and thrive. And we must bring on board the huge segments of humanity who succumb to greed and cruelty and elect abusive leaders out of fear or coercion.
Nonviolence is a way of resisting violence without becoming it.
It is organized, courageous, and disciplined. It is about telling the truth, confronting power, and standing with those who are most impacted.
Dr. King understood that nonviolence demands commitment. It demands action. And it demands a willingness to be uncomfortable for the sake of justice.
Following Dr. King’s example, we ask you to write or video record your own speech on nonviolence! You can write for the world, but we ask that you do it to your kids, your community, and/or your country and in your native language.
We will help you publish it on our website or tag / collaborate us on Instagram and Facebook!
The arc of the moral universe does not bend by itself. It bends when people choose to act.
Thank you for walking this path with us, today and every day.
In solidarity,
Michael Beer & Sami Awad, Co-Directors
P.S. Register for our upcoming webinar: Beyond Political Illusions: What This Moment Demands of Us, on Jan 21, at 10AM ET / 5PM Jerusalem time. We will have a powerful panel, including Jonathan Kuttab, Huwaida Arraf, and Jeff Halper.
This Webinar on January 21, at 10AM ET and 5PM Jerusalem time, entitled Beyond Political Illusions: What This Moment Demands of Us is a strategic conversation bringing together Jonathan Kuttab, Huwaida Arraf, and Jeff Halper. Building on earlier discussions that focused on NVI’s book “Beyond the Two State Solution” this webinar responds to the current reality of genocide, escalating violence, and deepening impunity across Palestine. Our guests will clarify what international law and moral responsibility require of us now to manifest a new society committed to nonviolence, justice, equality, and the dignity of life. Register here!
Goals:
- Support Jeff Halper’s 1 state campaign
- Encourage worldwide book groups around Jonathan’s book
- Clarify the political reality in Palestine and move beyond dominant political frameworks that have collapsed
- Explore what international law, nonviolent action and moral responsibility require of individuals and movements
- Challenge all the existent political frameworks and question how individuals and movements can actually push for alternative frameworks to be put in action
Nonviolence Must Prevail in Iran
As we write this, the people of Iran are demonstrating in the streets of their cities and towns for the last 3 weeks.. They are calling for change and demanding to be heard, despite the violence they are facing from their own government — the death toll may be over 2000 people. The world needs to understand what is happening and why we must respond with urgency and wisdom.
What Is Happening in Iran?
In late December 2025, shopkeepers in Tehran closed their stores. These were not political radicals,these were ordinary business owners who could no longer survive. The cost of food had risen dramatically, after Iran's currency, the rial, lost nearly half its value in 2025. What began as protests about the economy quickly became something much larger. People across Iran, students, pensioners, young people, merchants, took to the streets. They are now calling not just for economic relief, but for fundamental change in how their country is governed. The protests have spread to at least 185 cities. Demonstrations have erupted on university campuses. The chants in the streets express deep frustration: "Death to the Dictator" and "Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, My Life for Iran."
This is not the first time Iranians have risen up. Many remember the Woman, Life, Freedom protests in 2022 after Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman, died in custody after being arrested for not wearing her hijab "correctly." Those demonstrations were met with brutal force—tear gas, mass arrests, and live ammunition. Hundreds died and thousands were imprisoned, but Iranians now state that the morality police are less visible in many urban areas, and many women are openly foregoing the veil without immediate crackdowns.
But the roots go deeper. For decades, Iranians have lived under a system where one man, the Shah Pahlavi, and then the Religious Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, holds ultimate power over all major decisions. Elections happen, but real power remains concentrated in an unelected official. Young Iranians, who make up a large portion of the population,see no future for themselves. They watch their government spend money supporting armed groups in other countries while they struggle at home. They see corruption, mismanagement, and their voices ignored.
The government blames Iran's economic problems on international sanctions—restrictions placed on Iran by other countries, particularly the United States. While sanctions have certainly contributed to economic hardship, Iran's leaders have begun to admit that their own governance failures share responsibility. President Masoud Pezeshkian, elected in 2024 on promises of economic reform, acknowledged this reality even as the protests spread.
The Violence We Condemn
We are deeply concerned about active violence from all sides. Some protesters have thrown stones and burned government buildings. Government armed actors have been killed. We understand the rage that drives such actions, but we believe that sustainable democratic change comes through disciplined, nonviolent resistance.
Our greatest concern, however, is the violence perpetrated by the Iranian government. The state possesses a complete monopoly on weapons—guns, tear gas, riot control equipment, and the entire security apparatus. Reports indicate that hundreds of protesters have been killed, many shot at close range with live ammunition. Thousands have been arrested. Iran's attorney general has warned that protesters could face charges carrying the death penalty.
The government has shut down internet access in many areas, cutting Iranians off from the outside world and making it difficult to document what is happening. In 2025, Iran executed at least 1,500 people—the highest number in nearly 40 years—as part of what appears to be a deliberate strategy to instill fear. As adherents to Islam, a religion espousing peace, this violence against your own people is haram and unacceptable.
We call on the US and Israel to stop their attacks and continued threats of bombing and regime change. Some desperate Iranians have unwisely called for foreign armed intervention hoping for some miracle. This is more likely to increase government repression.
International sanctions, particularly those imposed by the United States, have for the most part devastated Iran's economy. These sanctions fall most heavily on ordinary Iranians—the same people now protesting in the streets. Sanctions make food more expensive. They restrict access to medicine. They destroy jobs and opportunities. In effect, the international community is punishing the Iranian people for the actions of a government they did not choose and cannot change through normal democratic means.
What the World Must Do
The United States and the international community must lift economic sanctions on Iran. Sanctions strengthen authoritarian governments by giving them an external enemy to blame, by forcing citizens to depend on the state for survival, and by creating a siege mentality that makes reform more difficult. Lifting sanctions would empower the Iranian people. It would improve their economic conditions and give them breathing room to organize and demand change. It would remove the government's favorite excuse for economic failure. And it would demonstrate that the international community stands with the Iranian people, not against them. A best outcome would be for the US and other nations to pay reparations for unwarranted suffering. The US and the UN should call for and enforce a Nuclear Weapons Free Middle East (West Asia).
A Nonviolent Path Forward
We call on the Iranian government to recognize the legitimate grievances of its people, and to engage in dialogue and compromise rather than violence. When a government responds to peaceful protest with bullets, it reveals its own weakness and desperation.
The best outcome we can envision is a referendum on Iran's constitution and genuinely free elections where Iranians can choose their own path forward. The current constitution concentrates power in the hands of unelected religious authorities. The previous constitution did so with an unelected monarch.
Iranians deserve the opportunity to decide what kind of country they want to live in.
What matters is that the Iranian people are the ones who determine their future. Not foreign governments, not military intervention, not external pressure. The people themselves, through their courage and their commitment to justice. We have witnessed people power transform nations—from the Philippines to Poland to Chile to South Africa. We have seen ordinary citizens, armed only with their conviction and their willingness to stand together, overcome seemingly invincible authoritarian systems. The path is never easy. The cost is often high. But change is possible.
Our Message to the People of Iran
You are not alone. The world sees you and our courage inspires us. Your determination to build a better future for yourselves and your children gives us hope.
As part of developing any nonviolent strategy in any situation, certain issues are important to take into account. We urge you to remain disciplined in your protests. We understand that the government uses violence out of desperation, but we encourage Iranians to continue to use measures that sometimes lowers the violence and in some cases improves effectiveness:
- Protest primarily during the day time.
- Invite all people, including women, elderly and children to participate.
- Support the creation of a national network of Mothers and Families of the Martyrs.
- Video record everything.
- Denounce attacks on mosques or Islam, even though many see that the religion has been corrupted and misused by state power.
- Look to the medical community for emerging and credible alternative leadership.
- Build mutual aid networks
- Use of non-cooperation techniques such as boycotts and merchant strikes.
- Use of tactics dispersed over a large area.
- Build unity with the diaspora in spite of its extreme elements.
Nonviolent resistance is not passive, it is strategic. It builds broader support, both within Iran and internationally. It withdraws support for the pillars of power, particularly if society uses tax resistance and general strikes.We know that many of you are feeling desperate and wanting revenge for the suffering. But feelings and violent revolution without modern weapons will likely not achieve your goals. You are welcome to get more ideas on possible tactics from our catalogue of 346 tactics in our huge global database and also explained in our Farsi language downloadable book, Civil Resistance Tactics of the 21st Century.
To the international community: Do not abandon the Iranian people in their hour of need. Sanctions are not solidarity. Lift the economic restrictions that make their lives harder. Support their right to determine their own future. And make clear that the world is watching how their government responds.
The road ahead for Iran is uncertain. But in the streets of Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, and hundreds of other cities, the Iranian people are writing a new chapter in their long history. They are reclaiming their voice and demanding their dignity. They are showing the world that the human spirit cannot be crushed, no matter how heavily the boot presses down.
History will remember this moment. Let us ensure that history records not just the suffering, but the courage. Not just the violence, but the resistance. Not just the crisis, but the possibility of transformation. The people of Iran are crying out for justice. The question is whether the world will listen—and whether we will respond with wisdom, compassion, and solidarity.