Four months of war in Sudan

According to an article by Zeinab Mohammed Salih, the war between Sudan’s generals is entering its fourth month with no deal in sight. The conflict has receded from the headlines while negotiations have stalled. Without a resolution soon, war and displacement threaten to destabilize the entire region.

Sudan’s war between the regular army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), currently raging in the capital city Khartoum and the Darfur and Kordofan regions, has entered its fourth month with no sign of a deal to stop it.  

The war has already claimed the lives of thousands of people who have died from direct fire, and some from hunger—trapped inside their houses and unable to find food due to intense street fighting. Many buried their loved ones inside their own homes.  

Some international and regional peace efforts took place at the war's start but with insignificant effect on the situation on the ground. Most notably, in the first few days, the United States and Saudi Arabia tried to secure ceasefires to create humanitarian corridors. However, of the 12 ceasefires declared, none were successful. The fighting has never stopped, leaving millions of civilians with zero access to lifesaving aid.  

Sudan quickly fell out of the news cycle a few weeks after the war began when foreign nationals were successfully evacuated—resembling Afghanistan in August 2021 when the United States pulled out its troops after 20 years.

Stories of Sudanese and their suffering have become far less interesting to international audiences than the war in Ukraine and the quick response by the West.  

Sudan typically only makes it into the headlines if the story is attached to Wagner Group and Russia. Though some reports suggested that the Wagner group has links with the RSF, no evidence supports that claim. 

Intelligent sources in Libya say that the RSF is getting support from the United Arab Emirates through Wagner-controlled areas in the Central African Republic.

This may be correct, especially after the RSF captured the strategic army base of Om Dafoug on the border between the two countries. The RSF now has control all the way from Om Dafoug to Omdurman, the twin city of Khartoum on the west bank of the Nile River. 

This control makes it easy for them to smuggle weapons to the capital city, Khartoum. A media report suggested that at least 28 flights between the UAE and CAR took place within two weeks in May, with stops at the Entebbe airport in Uganda.  

The US and Saudi Arabia, with their huge sway over the fighting generals, Abdulfatah al-Burhan, head of the Sudanese army, and Mohamed Hamdan Daglo (better known as Hemti), head of the RSF, seem not to be bothered about the struggle of millions of us who are now trapped in the cities of Khartoum, Darfur and al-Obied. This was demonstrated very clearly when they announced they would be pausing talks in Jeddah for Eid al-Adha festivals while the Sudanese people remained under constant bombardment by the army’s air force and heavy artillery and attacked in their houses by the RSF in the capital and by its militias in Darfur.  

Some economic sanctions have been imposed on both warring parties by the United States, freezing the assets of some companies that are known to support them financially. A similar step was taken by the United Kingdom last week but had no effect. The warring parties have maintained their businesses all along, as did the former regime of Omar al-Bashir, which survived 20 years of sanctions by the US by forming alliances with China and Russia. The army’s supporters here in Khartoum suggest the same to alleviate pressure from these sanctions.  

With its strong connections to Russia, the army sent a delegation to Moscow earlier this month headed by Malik Agar, the new deputy head of the sovereign council. The army showed its potential to follow in the footsteps of Bashir by attacking Western representatives. Its delegates declared the head of the United Nations mission in the country, Volker Perthes, “persona non grata” two weeks after the army chief accused him of inflaming the conflict and called for his removal. After that, they refused the initiative from the regional body, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), currently headed by Kenya, instead accepting Egypt’s initiative, the summit on Sudan, despite producing the same recommendations.  

Eighty percent of hospitals have been forced to close, with very few pharmacies still functioning. Food prices have increased sharply, and many have limited access after the army hit many markets in Khartoum and Omdurman, killing dozens of civilians, including women and children. Many people have died of avoidable diseases for lack of healthcare. Furthermore, the RSF bombed people inside their medical facilities. 

About 50% of the city’s population has fled. Those who remain are here for financial or health reasons, and many more who stay hail from provinces where fierce fighting is ongoing, like Kordofan and Darfur in Western Sudan.  

The city and all its strategic locations have been occupied by RSF fighters, except three, the Wadi Saeedna airbase, the engineer corps, and the al-Shajara artillery corps in Khartoum.

It was not difficult for them to take control despite being only half the size of the regular army, which controls 80% of the economy.

All the income goes to the pockets of the generals, while the soldiers only earn about $16 a month. Despite this leverage, the RSF seems more willing to negotiate, while army leaders refuse.  
 Many media reports suggest that former regime elements have been fighting alongside the army. It seems that they have influenced decisions within the army to the point where the former rulers, the National Congress Party, issued a statement warning General Shams al-Din Kabashi, who announced the potential start of negotiations with the RSF in Jeddah and that the army is open to have a civilian government until upcoming elections, against such a move.  

In order for the United States and the international community to make the army and the RSF sit down and talk seriously to end the misery of the Sudanese people, they need to use their leverage over the UAE, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.

According to some reports from Chad, the UAE managed to send military equipment through Amdjarass airport near the Sudanese border to the RSF. Many reports have suggested that Egypt has also intervened militarily using its air force to hit two RSF convoys, one coming from Libya and the other from Kordofan to Omdurman. Unless pressure is put on the UAE and Egypt to stop supporting the two warring sides, the prolonged conflict will destabilize the whole region from the Sahel to the Horn of Africa.  

The Kenyan president, William Ruto, has been the only public leader to warn against crimes in Darfur that might reach the level of genocide after the killing of thousands of civilians from the Massaleet community, including the governor and the brother of the traditional leader, in one city by Arab militias backed by the RSF. This has led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands more people to neighboring Chad.  

Monitoring the ceasefire needs on-the-ground mechanisms that can be established through sending peacekeeping forces to Khartoum and Darfur with a limited mission—all past ceasefires have been violated by the two sides for lack of monitoring. The suggestion of the IGAD to send eastern African forces might lead to huge resistance from the former regimes’ military elements, which could lead to resurfacing of jihadist groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS; all have cells in Khartoum and some of their members have broken out of Sudanese prisons.  

The best solution would be to exert pressure on both sides—as the United States did when the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between North and South Sudan was signed in 2005. In order to do so, it must get all the rebel groups in South Kordofan and Darfur and the civilians in Khartoum to participate.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Egypt could help end Sudan conflict

Egypt recently took the initiative to host a summit in order to address the civil war in Sudan. The summit brought together leaders from several countries, including the Central African Republic, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Libya, and South Sudan.

However, notably absent from the summit were representatives from the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF). At the Cairo summit, the Egyptian leadership wanted to draw a framework for any potential peace agreement and to remind all parties to facilitate the humanitarian corridors for civilians for aid delivery.

Egypt possesses historical and political influence in the MENA region, enabling it to potentially bring about an end to the conflict. By engaging directly with the key stakeholders in Sudan as well as their regional supporters, Egypt can initiate negotiations for sustainable political reforms by creating the environment where both sides and their supporters agree to sit together and try to reach sustainable peace.

The conflict has the potential to be long-lasting due to the steadfastness of both parties in their positions. General Mohamed Hemeti declared that he is present on the field and would not cease fighting until he achieved the desired goal, overthrow the government and seize power. Similarly, General Abdel Fattah Al-Barhan announced that he was defending the Sudanese state's sovereignty.

Numerous efforts to bring about peace in Sudan have proven unsuccessful so far due to disagreements involving the mediators and the parties involved in the conflict. A notable instance occurred when Khartoum raised objections to the peace initiative presented by Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and rejected Kenya’s chairmanship of the conflict resolution committee, claiming that the Kenyan president favors the RSF. Furthermore, both parties opposed a demand from Ethiopia to impose a no-fly zone in Sudan. Additionally, Sudan vehemently rejected a proposal to deploy East African forces, even going so far as to threaten the suspension of its membership in the East African bloc of IGAD.

The Sudanese leadership strongly believes that the deployment of foreign troops would only prolong the conflict by potentially involving external actors. They also harbor concerns that Ethiopia and Kenya may stand to benefit from Sudan's vulnerability and its inability to unite its own factions, thereby gaining regional power.

This objection to various proposals from neighboring countries indicates that the solution in Sudan can’t be found through traditional ways. The warring parties have to agree on one regional mediator—a country or a regional organization with good relations with both SAF and RSF—to end the conflict.

The Cairo summit stressed that the Sudan conflict would only be resolved in Sudan, closing the door to any external interference in Sudan. An announcement is welcomed in Khartoum, but it still could not end the conflict or at least bring both warring parties to the negotiation table. 

Egypt and Sudan have long been connected by historical, social, and political ties, as well as a shared destiny as one nation. This led the Egyptian Parliament in October 1951 to amend King Farouk's title to the King of Egypt and Sudan.

Egypt fears that the outbreak of conflict in Sudan could lead to the influx of mercenaries and armed militants through the country's southern borders. Intelligence reports suggest that Hemeti and his forces receive military support from several Arab and foreign countries.

Reports have also revealed a relationship between the Wagner Group, a Russian military contractor, and the Rapid Support Forces. 

The Wall Street Journal reported that General Khalifa Haftar in Libya is supplying weapons to Hemeti.

This unstable security situation in Sudan, coupled with the availability of arms and equipment from various regional and international parties, is a cause for concern for the Egyptian administration.

Egypt maintains strong alliances and close ties with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Libya, making it an important regional player. Furthermore, Egypt has established a stable relationship with Russia. These connections enable Egypt to communicate effectively with its regional allies, who possess significant influence and leverage over the RSF, thereby increasing the chances of initiating negotiations.

Egypt enjoys a distinct bond with the Sudanese army, characterized by shared experiences and military strategies. By leveraging these relationships, Cairo has the potential to resolve the conflict by convening both opposing factions in Cairo and creating regional support to ensure a lasting peace.

The Cairo initiative received a positive response on social media from both conflicting parties. Additionally, all seven neighboring nations expressed their support for the initiative, which is considered as a significant accomplishment for the leadership in Egypt. With its strong political influence and regional power status, Cairo has the opportunity to leverage its relationships to advance towards a durable and extended ceasefire. The ultimate goal is to establish a comprehensive plan for political reform and ensure transparent elections. Consequently, it is crucial for Egypt to capitalize on the achievements of the Cairo summit and take further steps to promote stability in the region, which is of great importance to the country. 

 

Jeddah Declaration: Sudanese rivals agree to protect civilians

Sudan's warring factions have committed to protect civilians and allow the movement of humanitarian aid. The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and its rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) signed a document titled "Jeddah Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan" early Friday.

They reaffirmed their core obligations under International Humanitarian Law to facilitate humanitarian action to meet the needs of civilians.

“We affirm our unwavering commitment to the sovereignty of Sudan and to maintaining its unity and territorial integrity,” according to the joint declaration.

They welcomed the efforts exerted by Sudan’s friends who can use their relationships and good offices to ensure respect for International Humanitarian Law and for international human rights law, including by committing to this Declaration and immediately implementing it.

“We agree that the interests and well-being of the Sudanese people are our top priority and affirm our commitment to ensure that civilians are protected at all times. This includes allowing safe passage for civilians to leave areas of active hostilities on a voluntary basis, in the direction they choose,” the declaration read.

They committed to exert all efforts to ensure that these commitments—and all obligations of International Humanitarian Law—are fully disseminated within their ranks and appoint focal points to engage with humanitarian actors to facilitate their activities.

“We will enable responsible humanitarian actors, such as the Sudanese Red Crescent and/or the International Committee of the Red Cross to collect, register, and bury the deceased in coordination with competent authorities,” the declaration read.

“We will take all necessary measures to ensure that all persons acting on our instructions, direction or control abide by International Humanitarian Law, and in particular the commitments provided for in this Declaration of Commitment.”

They agreed to prioritize discussions to achieve a short-term ceasefire to facilitate the delivery of emergency humanitarian assistance and restoration of essential services, and announced their commitment to scheduling subsequent expanded discussions to achieve a permanent cessation of hostilities.