However, I have seen very few words or actions of support from the Sudanese people, political parties or Sudan's independent civil society in support of Iranians who have risked and continue to risk their lives for the truth under oppressive conditions.

Yes, one election is not likely to lead to a consolidated democracy. But an excessive focus on the short-term and on the outcome of the next election is a fatal approach.

After all, these are the most populous, peaceful and symbolic people-led demonstrations the Middle East has ever experienced.

In recent days the Iranian regime started to use violence against demonstrators and has arrested prominent opposition members. If this had been Gaza, we would have been drowned in pleas for support and government-organized demonstrations in Sudan.

Of course, authoritative regimes have no interest in drawing attention to Iranians suffering under the iron fist of their own unyielding dictatorship. But I am sure that regimes in Africa, the Islamic and the Arab world are watching with fear, and wondering if what is happening "there" could happen "here."

There are many ideological parallels that make Iran's experience relevant to Sudan, so let's not lose this opportunity to reflect and to act. What is happening in Iran is a window of opportunity for Sudanese civil society to show that it is part of a global movement that has universal values and aspirations.

It is also a chance to start a renewed, creative, realistic and inclusive dialogue on peaceful democratic transformation. Sudan's independent civil society is often branded by the governing National Congress Party as "communist," "secular," "un-Islamic" or simply as the "opposition." Iran's Green Revolution shows that freedom and citizens’ rights are universal — and that even an Islamic regime that came to power through legitimate elections can be questioned and rejected by those who put it in office.

True, Sudan’s status is very far from Iran's political context. Functional political institutions simply do not exist. However, a pivotal moment in Iran's recent history came with the 1997 election that brought to power the reformist Islamic regime of Mohammad Khatami.

I am sure that regimes in Africa, the Islamic and the Arab world are watching with fear, and wondering if what is happening "there" could happen "here."

Since then, Iran's middle class has doubled through expanded access to health and education. This has had the effect of modernizing a large portion of Iran’s population and improving the situation of women by giving them equal educational and professional opportunities.

Today, 70% of Iran’s population are youth who are challenging Ahmedinajad and his regime, which has been unable to meet their needs for employment, free, competitive markets and an equitable distribution of oil wealth.

In comparison, Sudan’s middle class is shrinking very fast. Quality education is limited to the elite. Institutions of higher education are mostly clustered around the capital and show bias in their admission against students from rural areas. Not to mention that most new graduates do not have the skills necessary for a globalized world, and are not able to easily join the labor market.

Although there is an obvious economic boom, Sudan is trapped in excessive centralization of power and wealth.

Lessons from Iran

Recent events in Iran show that power comes in numbers. Some estimates of the June 16 demonstration (some prefer to call it a march) in Tehran say that seven million people showed up (almost half of Tehran’s population).

The first four demonstrations were mostly peaceful, characterized by the absence of riot police, an atmosphere of silence, the color green and strong slogans that captured the attention of the world such as, "Where is my vote?", "God is great and truth will prevail" and “The key to victory: Calmness, Hope and Patience.”

Those words and the powerful images that accompanied them were shared with the world mostly by Iranian citizens who tactically responded to their government's ban on international media by using their own phones and digital cameras to post images and words on YouTube, Twitter and other Internet outlets. Although some have called this a “Twitter Revolution,” this is nothing but an Iranian revolution.

Iran's Green Revolution shows that freedom and citizens’ rights are universal — and that even an Islamic regime that came to power through legitimate elections can be questioned and rejected by those who put it in office.

Iranians wrote their own story, created their own history and shared with the world what their regime would have otherwise kept hidden.

A journalist from the BBC (the network was banned from Iran) commented about the inflow of information coming from Iranian citizens by saying, "The days when regimes can control the flow of information are over.”

Sudan's independent media suffers from excessive censorship. Sudanese youth can learn a great lesson from Iranian youth about alternative media and the power of citizen journalism. Iranian youth are not only more educated in comparison to their Sudanese counterparts, but they also posess the technological savvy to bypass government proxies.

With Sudan's national elections around the corner, there is great pessimism amongst the independent civil society, as the challenge of voter education is immeasurable and the time, resources and freedom to conduct such activities is limited. There is similar pessimism amongst the youth and the educated class who believe that this election will not bring change.

They say there is no alternative leadership that will bring the stability and relative economic progress we see today, and therefore, they question the point of participating in an election that will bring the same old faces.

Yes, one election is not likely to lead to a consolidated democracy. But an excessive focus on the short-term and on the outcome of the next election is a fatal approach.

What is happening in Iran is a window of opportunity for Sudanese civil society to show that it is part of a global movement that has universal values and aspirations.

The question is: If the National Congress Party (NCP) comes to power after the elections of 2010, how can Sudanese citizens ensure that the regime will be more accountable; transparent about the use of national resources; ready to address issues of social and economic injustice; and committed to improving access to services in rural areas?

If the NCP is forced to address these issues before the election, then a dialogue can continue afterwards. They can be questioned on what they deliver or fail to deliver.

So far, many in civil society and among opposition parties refuse to entertain a dialogue with the NCP on tangible issues — rather than on power politics. With a little bit of imagination and long-term vision, the discussion of everyday economic and governance matters might be the strategy for future progress — a strategy that requires patience and persistence.

For donors who are planning to pour millions of dollars into election administration, monitoring and voter education in the next six months, this is an important message.