What is the situation in Sudan?
Conflict in Sudan broke out in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the paramilitary group known as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo. They are both locked in a power struggle to control the state and its resources.
The effects are staggering. Since fighting broke out, 15,000 people have been killed. 25.6 million people—half of Sudan’s population—are facing “the world’s largest hunger crisis”. 80% of the country’s hospitals have been destroyed leaving over 15 million people without healthcare. Lack of necessities such as food and water has pushes over 8.2 million to flee to neighbouring countries or to Internally Displaced Persons Camps. Camps are severely impoverished, with Doctors Without Borders estimating that thirteen children are dying every day from malnutrition in just one camp.
Extreme violence exacerbates the situation. Both the SAF and the RSF have committed war crimes. The SAF is weaponizing starvation by blocking the flow of crucial humanitarian aid into the country. The RSF has pursued ethnic cleansing – systematic murdering of men, boys and even infants from the Masalit tribe and other non-Arab groups. Neither party has agreed to end fighting and previous peace negotiations have failed due to the parties failing to uphold agreements – or failing to attend. Sexual violence from both sides has risen to alarming levels with refugees reporting frequently witnessing rape and assault.
Why is global action needed?
It’s unquestionable that global action is needed to end the horrific crisis unfolding in Sudan. But beyond the international community’s moral duties to intervene lies the partly ignored, yet very real global consequences that an untamed crisis could generate. Endre Stiansen, former Norwegian ambassador to Sudan says the “war impacts three continents”. Sudan sits at the intersection of the middle east and Africa and has over 800km of Red Sea Coastline, with oversight over the shipping lanes through which 12% of world trade travels. A failed Sudan breeds instability into the middle east, its seven already vulnerable neighbours, could become a haven for terrorists and send migrants to Europe.
Sudan’s strategic position has enticed external powers to partake in the conflict. Credible sources sent to the United Nations point to the United Arab Emirates’ role in supplying the RSF with weapons and soldiers. The UAE denies this. Amgad Fareid Eltayeb, analyst and former senior aide to Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok says the support is linked to Abu Dhabi’s interest in preserving its long-term investments and influence in Sudan. Iran is reportedly arming the SAF, interested in having a presence on the red seacoast, controlled by the latter. Involvement of external powers has turned a local conflict into a transnational one. Any peace deal would therefore have to be a transnational one.
Why then, has no effort been made to implement a transnational deal?
A first factor is to do with the perceived lack of interest. The bandwidth of international diplomacy is at present taken up by the wars in Gaza and Ukraine. This is not to understate the horrors unfolding in each of these situations, but to not give the worst humanitarian crisis the same amount of attention is a failure of solidarity and a betrayal to the people of Sudan. Michelle Gavin, African policy expert from the Council of Foreign Relations says disparity of effort “becomes part of a broader narrative about disregard and disrespect”. Moreover, great powers have failed to condemn intervening middle powers in their violation of the UN arms embargo, designed to prohibit the flow of weapons. This lends to the lack of interest narrative since countries like the USA prioritise their relationship with the UAE as strong partners in the Abraham Accords. Inevitably, this leads to the erosion of trust in great powers and international institutions’ willingness and capacity to mediate.
There have been attempts to de-escalate the situation. A second problem lies with the fact that such attempts fail to consider civilians. On January 4th, Burhan welcomed a Turkish officer to mediate between Sudan, represented by the SAF, and the UAE. The marginalization of the RSF from talks is evidence of trying to seek a diplomatic, military negotiation at the detriment of civilians because the RSF is the only party that provides humanitarian aid to the population. America took a considerable step on January 7th in recognizing the RSF had committed genocide against the Masalit tribe despite credible claims this had started in April 2023. The move comes just days before President Biden is due to leave office and represents more of an effort to position his administration’s legacy on the right side of the story.