What are the objectives moving towards 2011

Seems to me that commentators on Sudan's path to 2011 should always state up-front what they think are the important objectives are behind their macro-analysis. Here's my suggested list, in my own order of importance:

1. South: Referendum and likely separation to happen through free and fair referendum in 2011
2. Darfur: Darfur armed groups to demobilize, IDPs to have safe return and compensation
3. Justice: Persons responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity to face some reasonable form of justice (I'd settle for exile from Sudan, if that is what it took to get 1/2 to happen).
4. Poverty: Basic framework for sustained pro-poor growth established in North and South
5. Extremism: Extremist Islamic impulses channeled to civil society rather than to militancy
6. North: Restoration of rule of law and civilian rule in North (Mansour Khalid wrote is well more than two decades ago... The Government they Deserve

So a commentator could begin an article with:
Darfur, Justice, Poverty, South, North, Extremism (Save Darfur?)
or
Extremism, North, Darfur, South, Poverty, Justice (the Neocons?)
or
Poverty, Darfur, South, North, Extremism, Justice (Sachs?)
or
Poverty, North, Darfur, South, Extremism, Justice (Mamdani?)

Then you would know what they think is the priority. We could then ask what they thought the social welfare function was, starting with which population was included in the welfare function: only Northern Sudanese, all Sudanese except Northerners, Sudanese and Europeans and Americans, etc.

Useful exercise also is to ask how particular actors would likely prioritize these goals. Six actors in particular are important. China/Russia; Umma/DUP; U.S.; SPLM; JEM; NCP.

Let's see what I think the matrix looks like:


Gosh, nobody seems to care much about restoration of rule of law in the North. Doesn't that make people like Abdullahi An-Na'im pissed off?