09/19/2024 - 22:07 PM
By Yazeed Al Rashed Al Khuzai *
The conflict in Sudan is not a transient event or typical political tension; rather, it reflects a critical phase in the history of this African nation, which has witnessed significant transformations since its independence. Sudan, with its strategic location in northeastern Africa and a coast on the Red Sea, represents a historical and political crossroads between the Arab and African worlds. Over the past decades, Sudan has been no stranger to internal tensions and civil wars. However, the current conflict between the Sudanese army, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, commonly known as “Hemedti,” has plunged the country into unrelenting violence on a scale not seen in years.
What distinguishes this conflict is its complexity. It intertwines political, economic, and social factors with overlapping military calculations, making it a prolonged and multi-dimensional struggle. When discussing Sudan, it is crucial to recall its division into two countries in 2011, when South Sudan became an independent state. The recent events have only added to the complexity of the situation, with the conflict between Burhan and Hemedti extending beyond a mere power struggle to reflect deep political and social divides within Sudan’s fabric.
This ongoing conflict starkly highlights the failure of successive Sudanese governments to build a stable state based on democratic institutions capable of accommodating the country’s ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity. Moreover, the conflict underscores the significant role external factors play in inflaming internal strife, as Sudan has become a battleground for intersecting regional and international interests. Neighboring countries and major powers now have vested interests in the trajectory of the conflict, making peace an even more challenging prospect than merely ending armed clashes.
Studying this conflict comes at a critical time, as Sudan faces not only the risk of economic and political collapse but also social disintegration, which could trigger a new wave of migration and displacement, not to mention catastrophic humanitarian repercussions.
With trust between the warring parties eroded and the involvement of external powers with divergent agendas, peace remains a distant hope. Therefore, exploring the roots of this conflict, analyzing its causes and dimensions, and attempting to forecast its future is imperative—not only to understand the situation in Sudan but also to glean lessons on managing similar crises in other countries facing analogous conditions. Sudan stands at a crossroads today, where the end of the conflict could either mark the beginning of a new era of stability and growth or plunge the country deeper into chaos and division.
A Glimpse into History
Since gaining independence in 1956, Sudan has experienced alternating periods of military and civilian rule. The first Sudanese government post-independence was civilian, but internal conflicts between the political forces, especially between the north and the south, soon erupted, leading to a military coup in 1958. This marked the beginning of a series of military governments that would seize power by force.
In the following decades, Sudan suffered from political instability due to tensions between various political parties and ethnic and cultural divisions between the north and the south. Notably, the First Sudanese Civil War (1955–1972) between the northern government and southern rebels ended with the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972, a turning point in Sudan’s history. However, the peace brought by the agreement was short-lived, and the Second Civil War broke out in 1983 after the government revoked the south’s autonomy and imposed Sharia law nationwide.
The Separation of South Sudan and the Flames of Darfur
Sudan has a long history of conflict between the north and the south, rooted in significant political, cultural, and religious disparities. While the Arab-Islamic majority in the north sought to impose centralized control, the African -Christian majority in the south clung to its distinct identity. These differences sparked the Second Civil War in 1983, plunging Sudan into over two decades of violence that claimed millions of lives and displaced countless others. This war was the result of a long history of political and economic marginalization faced by southern Sudan.
After years of armed conflict and humanitarian suffering, Sudan saw the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, a turning point in the country’s history. The CPA, signed between the Sudanese government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), granted southern Sudan autonomy and outlined the future of the country. The agreement not only ended the civil war but also paved the way for a referendum on southern independence.
This referendum, held in 2011, resulted in the secession of South Sudan and the establishment of a new state. However, this achievement was not enough to secure comprehensive stability in Sudan. The north continued to face deep political and economic challenges, especially in contested regions such as Abyei, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile, which remained hotspots due to unresolved issues over resource distribution and political influence.
In addition to the north-south conflict, another crisis emerged in the western part of the country, specifically in the Darfur region. In 2003, a rebellion erupted in Darfur due to the population's sense of political and economic marginalization by the central government. The Sudanese government responded by deploying the Janjaweed militias, Arab militias that brutally suppressed the rebellion, leading to accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Sudanese government.
The Darfur crisis drew significant international attention and resulted in the International Criminal Court (ICC) issuing an arrest warrant for former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. This conflict became a focal point in Sudanese conflicts, increasing pressure on the central government and further isolating Sudan internationally.
Attempts to achieve peace in Darfur have been no less complex. The Darfur Peace Agreement of 2006, signed in Abuja, Nigeria, did not bring about the desired peace, as not all rebel factions endorsed the agreement. While some signed, others refused to join, allowing the conflict to continue in Darfur. Despite local and international efforts to end the violence, Darfur continues to suffer from armed conflict and marginalization, with peace agreements failing to bring about lasting stability.
South Sudan: More Than Just a Secession
When South Sudan seceded in 2011, many anticipated a reduction in internal tensions within Sudan. However, the events that followed proved otherwise. The secession of the south, rich in natural resources, particularly oil, left Sudan in a precarious economic situation, as it lost the majority of its oil revenues.
Furthermore, the conflict in Darfur continued, and new tensions emerged in the border regions between Sudan and South Sudan. Although the secession provided temporary relief, internal conflicts persisted. Many areas in Sudan, especially in Darfur, Kordofan, and Blue Nile, continued to experience repression and marginalization by the central government.
Over time, independent military forces, such as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), emerged from the former Janjaweed militias to become a powerful entity in Sudan’s political and military landscape. Initially used by the government to suppress rebellions in Darfur, these forces evolved into an independent entity under the leadership of Hemedti, creating new tensions between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the RSF.
Sudan on a Boiling Plate
The downfall of President al-Bashir in 2019 led Sudan into a new phase of power struggles between the Sudanese Armed Forces, led by General al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces, led by General Hemedti. The SAF is the regular military force with traditional capabilities for managing military operations and controlling territories. In contrast, the RSF is a semi-military force that has grown independently and become a powerful player, thanks to its political and military influence on the ground.
General al-Burhan, the current commander of the SAF, became a prominent figure after the ouster of former President Omar al-Bashir in 2019. Since then, al-Burhan has sought to consolidate his power and lead the transitional phase that followed al-Bashir’s fall. However, ongoing tensions between the military council, civilian forces, and the SAF and RSF have persisted.
Meanwhile, Hemedti has emerged as one of the principal players in Sudan’s political and military scene. The RSF, initially pro-government militias in Darfur, has transformed into a powerful, relatively autonomous force. Hemedti, through his wealth and influence, has become a parallel force to the SAF, sometimes surpassing it, further complicating the political landscape.
Alliances and Power Balances
Since the outbreak of conflict between al-Burhan and Hemedti, several new alliances and power balances have formed in Sudan’s political arena. Al-Burhan has largely relied on the support of the regular army, traditional state institutions, and backing from regional and international forces seeking to maintain political stability in Sudan, such as Egypt and some Gulf states.
In contrast, Hemedti has formed complex alliances with semi-military groups and local tribes, while also securing financial and political support from countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia, which view the RSF as a partner in counter-terrorism and regional security services.
The balance between al-Burhan and Hemedti has not remained static; it has shifted with the developments on the ground. The RSF has expanded its influence in certain areas, while the SAF has sought to regain control of the capital and major cities. Meanwhile, civilian forces advocating for democracy and civilian rule find themselves caught between two military forces vying for power, complicating their position.
Ethnic and Tribal Divisions
One of the most prominent causes of conflict in Sudan is the deep-rooted ethnic and tribal divisions, which have a long history of rivalry and animosity between different tribes and ethnic groups. Sudan is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world, comprising over 500 ethnic groups that speak more than 100 different languages.
These ethnic divisions have been exacerbated by the policies of successive governments, which have sought to favor certain groups at the expense of others, fueling animosity and discrimination. For example, the Arab elites in northern Sudan wield more economic and political influence than the other ethnic groups in the south and west, sparking a sense of oppression among non-Arab tribes and groups.
The conflict between al-Burhan and Hemedti is an extension of this complex ethnic reality. Al-Burhan, who hails from the traditional military establishment, relies heavily on the support of northern elites and the regular army.
Meanwhile, Hemedti, a member of the Rizeigat tribe in Darfur, has deepened alliances with Arab tribes in western Sudan, relying on the RSF, which is largely composed of those tribes. These ethnic divisions have turned the conflict into a struggle for ethnic and political influence within the country.
Economic Disparities
In addition to ethnic divisions, economic disparities play a significant role in fueling the conflict. Sudan is rich in natural resources, particularly oil, which has long been the main source of national income. However, with the secession of South Sudan in 2011, Sudan lost a large portion of its oil reserves, severely weakening its economy. This secession did not resolve the economic problems; rather, it intensified competition over the remaining resources, especially among regions that feel marginalized by the central government in Khartoum.
In the current conflict, it is clear that oil and natural resources continue to play a critical role in fueling the war. The RSF, under Hemedti’s leadership, has gained control of several resource-rich areas, such as gold mines, providing it with strong economic leverage and enabling it to finance its independent military operations. This competition for resources further intensifies the conflict, as both parties seek control over resource-rich areas to enhance their economic and military capabilities.
Militarization of Power in Sudan
Since Sudan’s independence, successive governments have adopted policies characterized by authoritarianism and military repression, leading to accumulated feelings of injustice and anger among many segments of society. Both military and civilian governments alike have failed to provide a comprehensive governance model that achieves social and economic justice for all parts of Sudan.
The centralized policies pursued by the government in Khartoum have left many rural and remote areas feeling marginalized and oppressed. Moreover, the government’s responses to rebellions have always been primarily military, exacerbating the situation.
The military solution became the first, rather than the last, resort. This militarized approach to crisis management has contributed to worsening conditions, turning internal conflicts, starting with South Sudan, through the Darfur crisis, and up to the current conflict between al-Burhan and Hemedti, into the product of oppressive government policies that have played a significant role in dismantling Sudan’s social fabric and sowing discord among its tribes and ethnic groups.
Religion in the Sudanese Conflict
The role of religion in shaping conflicts in Sudan cannot be overlooked. While the current conflict between al-Burhan and Hemedti is not overtly religious, religion played a significant role in fueling tensions in previous periods of the country’s history.
During the presidency of Omar al-Bashir, Sharia law was imposed nationwide, sparking outrage among many non-Muslim groups in the south and deepening divisions. Religion in Sudan has often been used as a political tool to justify control and dominance by the ruling elites. Although the current conflict is primarily centered on military, economic, and political power, religion remains part of the cultural and political fabric that influences the trajectory of the conflict and shapes relationships between various factions.
Displacement and Refugee Crisis
The ongoing conflict in Sudan, particularly between the SAF and RSF, has led to catastrophic humanitarian consequences, displacing millions of people both internally and externally. The combat zones, especially in Khartoum and Darfur, have witnessed large waves of forced displacement, with civilians fleeing their homes in search of safety either in other regions or neighboring countries such as Chad, South Sudan, and Ethiopia.
The internal displacement crisis has been exacerbated by the lack of essential services in areas where the displaced have sought refuge, such as food, water, and healthcare, significantly increasing their suffering.
The number of displaced individuals is estimated to be in the millions, with no precise figures available due to the chaos engulfing the country. Refugees who have crossed borders into neighboring countries face harsh conditions in camps, as these host nations are themselves under economic strain, struggling to meet the needs of refugees. This, in turn, places additional pressure on humanitarian organizations attempting to provide assistance amid challenging security and political conditions.
War Crimes
As the conflict escalates, gross human rights violations have worsened, with reports of massacres and mass killings in conflict zones, particularly in Darfur.
Ethnic cleansing has been documented in some areas, where certain ethnic groups have faced systematic violence, including the deliberate destruction of their villages and homes. These actions have been carried out by the warring factions, including the RSF, which has previously been accused of widespread violations in Darfur.
It is crucial to address a highly sensitive issue here: the documented cases of rape and sexual assault, which have unfortunately become tools used by the warring parties to terrorize and subjugate the population. Women and girls in conflict areas have been repeatedly subjected to sexual violence, creating an atmosphere of fear and panic in local communities.
These grave violations reflect the complete collapse of security, as war crimes have become an unchecked daily occurrence. Tragically, this phenomenon is spreading globally as brute force increasingly dictates conflicts. Are we headed toward a return to the law of the jungle, where might makes right? Is this the price of the civilization we now live in?
International Humanitarian Aid
In response to the humanitarian disaster resulting from the conflict, there have been growing calls from the international community for urgent humanitarian intervention. UN agencies and international NGOs have attempted to provide humanitarian aid, but the ongoing conflict and lack of security have hindered access to the most affected areas. The World Food Program, UNHCR, and WHO are among the organizations trying to deliver emergency assistance. However, logistical challenges and limited funding complicate efforts to achieve an effective response.
Western nations have provided substantial humanitarian aid, but the main challenge lies in delivering it to those in need amid the ongoing conflict. Additionally, there is a shortage of funding for relief operations, exacerbating the situation and increasing humanitarian needs. This calls for the international community to continue providing support and emphasize the importance of political solutions that end the violence and open the door to more efficient aid delivery.
The International Claws in the Conflict
Regional powers have played a major role in shaping the trajectory of the conflict in Sudan. External regional interventions have not simply supported political solutions but have often been part of the crisis’s complexity. Sudan, with its strategic location adjacent to several influential countries, such as Egypt, South Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, has become an arena for power struggles among these nations, where their interest’s conflict and intersect with local conflicts.
Egypt, as one of Sudan’s northern neighbors, considers Sudan’s stability crucial to its national security, particularly concerning the Nile waters issue. Egypt is closely monitoring the situation and seeks to maintain the stability of the military regime in Sudan to serve its geopolitical interests. Historically, Cairo has supported military regimes in Sudan and maintained close ties with the Sudanese army, including supporting al-Burhan in his confrontation with the RSF.
Egypt fears that a deepening conflict could lead to the collapse of the Sudanese state, causing large refugee flows into its territory or paving the way for other powers’ interventions, which could threaten regional stability.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE, for their part, play a more complex role in the Sudanese conflict. These two Gulf States have heavily invested in Sudan, whether through financial support or indirect military interventions.
The UAE, in particular, has developed close ties with the RSF under Hemedti’s leadership and has benefited from its military capabilities in other conflicts, such as in Yemen. Additionally, both the UAE and Saudi Arabia seek to maintain their influence in Sudan to ensure the stability of the Red Sea, a vital strategic corridor for global trade.
South Sudan, Sudan’s southern neighbor, is directly affected by any tensions in northern Sudan, given the long border shared between the two and the historical conflict between the north and the south.
The South Sudanese government is attempting to act as a mediator in the conflict. However, South Sudan itself is grappling with significant internal crises, limiting its ability to influence the conflict substantially. Nonetheless, stability in northern Sudan is existentially important for Juba, as chaos in the north could spill over into the south, which still relies on Sudan for its oil exports through northern ports.
The United Nations and the African Union
Internationally, the United Nations has been one of the key actors attempting to mediate the conflict, with multiple peacekeeping missions in Sudan over the years. Despite UN efforts to de-escalate the conflict through peacekeeping missions and political mediation, the impact of these efforts has been limited due to the complexity of the conflict on the ground and the intersection of local and regional factors.
The African Union, for its part, has attempted to play an active role in finding a solution to the Sudanese crisis. It has launched several peace initiatives and dispatched diplomatic missions to bridge the gaps between the warring factions. However, the African Union faces significant challenges in addressing complex conflicts across the continent, including a lack of funding and reluctance from some of its members to intervene effectively in other states’ affairs. Despite these challenges, the African Union remains committed to its role as a mediator, benefiting from its deeper understanding of local challenges compared to other international organizations.
The Role of Western Nations and Sanctions
Western nations, including the United States and the European Union, are cautiously monitoring the situation in Sudan. These nations have imposed sanctions on some of the actors involved in the conflict, aiming to pressure the military leadership to return to the negotiation table. These sanctions have targeted 16 individuals and entities involved in the conflict, including freezing the assets of some Sudanese leaders, travel bans, and financial transfer restrictions. However, the impact of these sanctions on the ground has been limited, as the warring parties rely more on regional support from other countries or local resources like gold.
Since the fall of Omar al-Bashir’s regime, the United States has sought to push for a transitional process leading to civilian rule in Sudan. However, the growing influence of military forces and the conflict of interests in the region have made achieving this goal difficult. The main challenge facing the U.S. and Europe is how to balance maintaining regional stability with pushing for democracy and human rights. This contradiction has become evident in their handling of the Sudanese conflict, as they prefer to avoid direct intervention, opting instead for diplomatic pressure and sanctions.
Exploiting the Conflict for Long-Term Interests
Some regional powers see the conflict as an opportunity to strengthen their influence in Sudan and the region as a whole. For instance, Turkey seeks to expand its influence in the Horn of Africa and has capitalized on the political vacuum in Sudan to enhance its military and economic presence there. On the other hand, Israel, which is working to improve its relations with countries in the region, seeks to take advantage of Sudan’s fragile political situation to bolster its influence in the Red Sea region.
Challenges and the Current Cost of Bloodshed Between al-Burhan and Hemedti
The ongoing conflict between the SAF, led by al-Burhan, and the RSF, led by Hemedti, differs from previous conflicts due to its personal and complex nature. It is not just a battle along ethnic or economic lines but also a struggle for power between military leaders with personal ambitions to dominate authority.
This makes negotiations more complicated, as any settlement must address deeply conflicting personal and political interests. One of the main challenges is the lack of trust between the warring parties. Both al-Burhan and Hemedti accuse each other of conspiring to seize power. Previous experiences have shown that any fragile agreement can easily collapse if there are no strong international guarantees and accountability mechanisms. The absence of a significant civilian force capable of imposing the will of the Sudanese people complicates the negotiation landscape, as the conflict is now confined to two military forces that hold most of the ground power.
Moreover, regional interventions complicate efforts to reach a comprehensive settlement, as some regional countries have conflicting interests. Different external parties support different factions in the conflict, complicating negotiations. For instance, the UAE and Saudi Arabia provide varying degrees of support to al-Burhan, while the UAE also maintains a significant interest in Hemedti for economic and strategic reasons. The cost of the ongoing bloodshed is staggering, with more than 16,650 people killed and millions displaced. The moral toll of this conflict is immeasurable, as it represents a global tragedy of unimaginable proportions.
The Sudanese Economy Amidst War
The war between the SAF and RSF has brought about widespread economic paralysis in Sudan. Even before the conflict, the Sudanese economy was grappling with multiple crises, including high inflation, unemployment, and weak infrastructure. The military operations between the two main factions have only exacerbated these crises, pushing the Sudanese economy to the brink of total collapse.
Fighting in Khartoum and other major cities has halted economic activity across many sectors, including agriculture, trade, and industry. Additionally, major ports, such as Port Sudan, which serves as a vital artery for imports and exports, have been partially or completely shut down during periods of fighting, leading to shortages of basic goods and soaring prices. Moreover, the disruption of logistical supply chains and the severe impact on commercial activities have caused many foreign investors and companies to flee due to violence and instability.
Additional more, Inflation was already a major issue before the war has reached unprecedented levels due to the decline in domestic production and increased reliance on imports. This inflation has driven up the prices of essential goods such as food, medicine, and fuel, exacerbating the suffering of citizens who are living under harsh economic conditions. The Sudanese pound, already suffering from weak value, has lost further ground against foreign currencies, making international trade even more difficult.
Major Battles and Military Attacks
Since the conflict between the SAF and RSF erupted in April 2023, the country has witnessed a series of major battles that have significantly impacted the military and political landscape. The battles in the capital, Khartoum, have been particularly sensitive.
The RSF has sought to expand its control over the city and ensure dominance over key facilities such as the airport and the presidential palace. These battles have caused widespread destruction to infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and water and electricity facilities, severely affecting the daily lives of civilians.
Meanwhile, the battles in Darfur have been a major point of escalation. The RSF is trying to maintain its influence there, as Darfur represents a strategically important center for the RSF not only because of its historical presence in the region but also due to the natural resources that can be exploited to fund military operations.
On the other hand, the SAF has attempted to regain control of strategic areas in Darfur, but geographical difficulties and a lack of local support have hindered its progress. On the eastern front, the SAF has sought to strengthen its positions in Port Sudan and coastal areas to ensure the continuity of supplies and commercial operations. Control of the ports is vital for the SAF to maintain communication with the outside world and secure military supplies.
The Impact of War on Military Infrastructure and Resources
Sudan’s military infrastructure has been severely damaged by the current conflict. Many military bases, particularly in Khartoum, have suffered heavy damage, reducing the SAF’s ability to maintain control over certain areas. Additionally, command and communication centers have been affected, negatively impacting coordination between military units across the country.
Furthermore, the targeting of airports and military transportation facilities has hampered the SAF’s ability to move quickly between various fronts.
In contrast, the RSF has been able to capitalize on its decentralized infrastructure. Its reliance on mobile and flexible units has enabled it to quickly adapt to battlefield changes, making it more resilient in rural and mountainous areas. Financially, the conflict has directly impacted both parties' ability to fund their operations.
The SAF relies heavily on government funding and regional support, while the RSF draws on the resources it controls in Darfur, such as gold mines. With Sudan’s economy crippled by war, financing for the warring factions has become more complex, potentially escalating the conflict in search of new funding sources or leading to de-escalation if resources run out.
Where Are the Sudanese Army and the RSF Headed?
The military capabilities of both the SAF and the RSF have undergone significant transformations in recent years. The SAF has benefited from military training and upgrades from countries like Egypt, which has an interest in maintaining the SAF’s dominance in Sudan. Advanced military equipment, including fighter jets and heavy weaponry, has given the SAF a greater capacity to control urban areas and combat semi-military forces.
In contrast, the RSF has relied on unconventional strategies and the recruitment of fighters from local tribes. These forces have focused heavily on mobile units and surprise attacks in rural areas, giving them a greater ability to achieve rapid gains in the field despite their lack of traditional military training compared to the SAF.
The Role of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The ICC has long been an active party in trying to hold those responsible for crimes committed in Sudan accountable, particularly in Darfur. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for former President Omar al-Bashir in 2009 on charges including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity due to his role in suppressing the Darfur rebellion. However, al-Bashir has not yet been handed over to the ICC or tried for these crimes in Sudanese courts.
The current conflict raises new questions about the role of the ICC in pursuing justice for fresh violations. As violence between the SAF and RSF intensifies, new atrocities that may rise to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity have emerged. International pressure on the ICC to launch new investigations into the crimes committed during the current conflict is mounting.
Nevertheless, the ICC faces numerous obstacles in gaining access to Sudan and pursuing those responsible for these violations, including the refusal of some countries to cooperate with the court and the continued presence of the conflict's key actors in positions of power.
In parallel, there are calls from within the international and local communities for national trials and accountability for military leaders responsible for violations.
However, the greatest challenge remains the weakness and politicization of Sudan’s judicial institutions, making it difficult to establish fair and transparent trials under current conditions. In addition to the ICC, other international organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, are working to document violations and call on the international community to pressure Sudan to open investigations and hold those responsible accountable.
However, with the violence ongoing and the weakness of Sudanese judicial institutions, immediate accountability is unlikely. International and local civil society pressure will remain critical in pushing for justice and accountability in the post-conflict period. Achieving justice for the victims will require strong local and international mechanisms to prevent the recurrence of such crimes in the future.
Media and Public Opinion
The ongoing conflict in Sudan has garnered widespread media coverage on both local and international levels. Media has played a key role in conveying events and information related to the conflict’s developments, shaping both local and international public opinion.
Local media in Sudan has faced significant challenges due to the war, with journalists and media centers being targeted, and strict restrictions placed on coverage by the warring factions.
Additionally, media censorship and the clampdown on press freedom have made it difficult to deliver accurate and objective information about what is happening on the ground.
On the other hand, international media has played an important role in shedding light on the humanitarian crisis caused by the conflict. Networks such as Al Jazeera, BBC, and CNN have provided ongoing reports on field developments, including the humanitarian deterioration, mass displacement, and serious human rights violations. International coverage has helped raise global awareness about the crisis, prompting the international community to pressure the warring factions to halt the violence.
In addition to traditional media, social media has become a major source of information about the conflict. Sudanese citizens have used platforms like Twitter and Facebook to relay events in real-time and document violations and military confrontations.
The widespread use of smartphones has also provided live footage and instant documentation of what is happening on the front lines, making it difficult for the warring parties to hide the facts.
While media plays an important role in reporting the facts, the current conflict in Sudan has also seen the widespread use of propaganda and disinformation by the warring factions. The Sudanese government and the RSF have engaged in media campaigns aimed at discrediting the opposing side and garnering public support both locally and internationally. Military propaganda, used by various parties, seeks to downplay their losses while exaggerating the losses of their adversaries, as well as justifying attacks on civilians or opponents.
Analyzing Current Peace Initiatives
Amid the ongoing conflict between the SAF, led by al-Burhan, and the RSF, led by Hemedti, various local, regional, and international initiatives have emerged with the aim of ending the conflict and restoring peace and stability to Sudan. Despite the numerous attempts, most initiatives have faced significant obstacles due to the political and ethnic complexities and the lack of trust between the warring parties.
Among these initiatives, there has been regional mediation efforts led by the African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), which have sought to bring the warring parties to the negotiation table. However, these efforts have encountered hurdles, as the parties refuse to make substantial concessions, and the interests of intervening regional countries vary.
On the international level, the United Nations, in cooperation with Western powers such as the United States and the European Union, has attempted to offer peaceful solutions through the imposition of sanctions and the provision of economic incentives to the warring factions.
However, these efforts have not yet achieved the desired success. The warring parties remain entrenched in their positions, with control over military and economic power and the continuation of tribal and ethnic conflicts that further exacerbate the situation.
My Vision as a Researcher for Achieving Stability in Post-War Sudan
Although the current situation in Sudan is described as catastrophic due to the ongoing war and economic decline, there are wide-ranging opportunities for the post-war phase that can be exploited to rebuild the country and establish lasting stability. However, the success of this process largely depends on adopting serious and comprehensive political and economic strategies that go beyond partial or superficial solutions. Below are my core proposals and solutions for achieving this goal:
First, restoring political stability is a fundamental condition for economic recovery. No meaningful economic progress will be possible without political stability. Ending the war permanently and reaching a comprehensive political settlement is the key to getting Sudan back on the path to growth. The future Sudanese government must adopt a governance system that ensures the participation of all political, military, and civilian forces in decision-making processes.
The military elites that have dominated the political scene for years have demonstrated their limitations in providing lasting solutions. Therefore, transitioning to democratic civilian rule is essential for achieving peace.
Additionally, it will require reforming the electoral system and expanding political representation to include all segments of society, particularly marginalized areas that have long suffered from political and economic exclusion. Any sustainable political stability must ensure the equitable distribution of power to achieve justice and equality among all Sudanese citizens.
Second, rebuilding the destroyed infrastructure must be an economic priority. Post-war Sudan will face enormous challenges in rebuilding the infrastructure damaged by the conflict. Roads, bridges, ports, electricity, and water networks all need intensive efforts for rehabilitation.
This infrastructure is the backbone of any economy seeking recovery, and without it, the country will not be able to resume vital trade and economic activities. The reconstruction process will require significant international support, whether through concessional loans or direct foreign investment.
Sudan must improve its business environment and adopt legal and legislative reforms that ensure the rule of law and provide strong guarantees for investments. The international community must also recognize the importance of supporting Sudan during this sensitive phase to prevent the country from falling back into the cycle of violence.
Third, the equitable distribution of wealth and resources is essential for social stability. Sudan’s crises are not merely political or military; they are fundamentally economic and social, rooted in resource distribution. The neglect of the economic demands of rural and marginalized areas has been one of the main reasons for the outbreak of conflicts.
Therefore, the future Sudanese government must adopt fair economic policies that ensure the equitable distribution of wealth across all regions of the country. Sudan’s natural resources, such as gold and oil, have been exploited in the past primarily for the benefit of ruling elites.
Thus, the post-war government must create a plan to distribute resources in a way that ensures sustainable development in all regions, especially those affected by war, such as Darfur and South Kordofan. Achieving this goal requires deep economic reforms and the development of targeted development programs aimed at marginalized groups to improve their living standards.
Fourth, attracting foreign investment is crucial for economic growth. Sudan has significant economic potential due to its natural resources and is considered the world’s food basket. However, benefiting from these resources requires creating an attractive and reliable investment environment.
To achieve this, Sudan must improve its business climate and adopt legal reforms that ensure transparency and protect investors’ rights. Additionally, the government must work to strengthen the rule of law and provide an independent and fair judicial system that encourages long-term investment. Sudan should also capitalize on its strategic geographic location by forging economic partnerships with neighboring countries and the international community. Countries that supported Sudan during the war can play an important role in rebuilding the economy through direct investments or concessional loans.
Fifth, lifting international sanctions and restoring relations with the international community are necessary for economic recovery. Sudan must work to lift the international sanctions that have been imposed on it for years.
These sanctions have been one of the main obstacles to Sudan’s integration into global markets and its ability to benefit from global trade. Lifting the sanctions, however, requires Sudan to provide credible guarantees of its commitment to a comprehensive and lasting political settlement and to move away from human rights violations that were part of its past. Achieving this can open the doors to new investments and enhance Sudan’s ability to access international financial markets, thereby improving its international reputation.
Sixth, transitional justice as a means to achieve national reconciliation must be an integral part of any national reconciliation process in Sudan. The crimes and violations committed during the conflict cannot be overlooked without holding perpetrators accountable and compensating victims. Mechanisms must be established for national or international judicial processes to deliver justice.
This step will be essential for building trust between all conflicting factions. Transitional justice is not only aimed at punishing wrongdoers but is also a means of achieving reconciliation and fostering tolerance among the Sudanese people. Without such mechanisms, resentment and revenge may continue to threaten any potential peace process.
Despite all the challenges and obstacles, Sudan has real opportunities for recovery and rebuilding if political will and international support are present. The aforementioned proposals and solutions require comprehensive strategies that address all aspects of the Sudanese crisis—whether political, economic, or social.
For all readers
In this humble analysis, I find myself standing before a canvas of Sudan’s complex puzzles, between a land that embodies boundless generosity and profound pain, between an ancient heritage and a turbulent present filled with challenges. From my position as an analyst of this conflict, I see Sudan not just as a country but as a mirror reflecting human contradictions where tradition coexists with a will to survive, and optimism blends with tragedy.
This analysis is merely an initial entry into a long journey of exploration. Sudan cannot be fully understood through a few lines or even short studies. It is a country that deserves years of research to unlock the secrets of its rich mosaic and to reveal the mysteries of its depths, still unknown to us and the world at large.
*Political Analyst and Poet
Email: vipyazeed@gmail.com
Further Readings:
1. International Crisis Group, report titled: “Halting the Catastrophic Battle for Sudan’s El Fasher"
- Link:[https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/horn-africa/sudan/b198-halting-catastrophic-battle-sudans-el-fasher]
2. Human Rights Watch, report titled: “Sudan: New Mass Ethnic Killings, Pillage in Darfur”
- Link:[https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/sudan-new-mass-ethnic-killings-pillage-darfur]
Comments