US Prepares for ‘Day After’ the War in Sudan

Sudanese refugees (AFP)
Sudanese refugees (AFP)
TT
20

US Prepares for ‘Day After’ the War in Sudan

Sudanese refugees (AFP)
Sudanese refugees (AFP)

The US administration voiced its concern over reports of arms shipments sent by Iran to the Sudanese army in its war with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which is allegedly receiving support from Russia and other parties.
Washington is mainly concerned with the day after the war in Sudan, focusing on returning governance to civilians after the conflict.
The US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Molly Phee, recently traveled to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in connection with the African Union Summit.
She was accompanied by USAID Assistant Administrator for Africa Monde Muyangwa, Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa Mike Hammer, and Ambassador to Sudan John Godfrey, where they held a series of meetings focused on addressing Sudan's continuing conflict and humanitarian crisis.
The State Department reported that the officials' engagements in Sudan focused on stopping the conflict, facilitating humanitarian assistance, and uplifting pro-democracy civilians working to advocate for the Sudanese people and prepare for post-conflict governance.

Phee underscored that the US has long stood with the Sudanese people and against military governance and that ending the Sudan conflict and restoring civilian governance are high priorities for Washington.
In a meeting with women civil society representatives from different groups and regions across Sudan, the Assistant Secretary stressed the importance of Sudanese women's participation in a political process and a post-conflict civilian government.
She also discussed the severe impact that the fighting has had on women and girls, who have increasingly been targets for conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV), and ways to ensure that perpetrators of CRSV and other atrocities are held accountable.
- Popular organizations
The senior official also had the opportunity to speak with leaders of grassroots organizations and Resistance Committee members.
She commended these individuals' courageous efforts to rally support for and provide support to those most affected by the conflict, including by expanding international community engagement with local actors working to provide humanitarian assistance.
They discussed efforts to press the Sudanese army and the RSF leaders to end the fighting and facilitate humanitarian access to address the increasingly dire conditions on the ground.
According to the State Department's Statement, Phee also met with members of the "Taqaddum pro-democracy front and encouraged its further diversification – focusing on women, youth, civil society, grassroots organizations, and representatives of historically marginalized communities."
They aim to enable Sudanese civilians to speak with a more unified voice, calling for facilitating humanitarian assistance, ending the fighting, and returning governance to civilians after the conflict.
The US official consulted with key stakeholders on multilateral efforts to end the conflict, facilitate humanitarian assistance, and support Sudanese civilians.
- "Great concern"
Godfrey told reporters that Washington is "deeply concerned by external support" to the Sudanese Army and RSF.
He added, "There are reports about resumed ties between Sudan and Iran that could reportedly include Iranian materiel support to SAF, which is also very troubling and a source of great concern for us."
He stated that the US "urges external actors to refrain from providing material assistance" because it "prolongs the fighting, extends the war; it also reduces the prospects for finding a negotiated exit from the conflict."



Netanyahu’s Messages: Beyond Türkiye, Closer to Tel Aviv

Men inspect the site of an Israeli airstrike on Thursday morning, following the bombing in southern Hama Province (AFP). 
Men inspect the site of an Israeli airstrike on Thursday morning, following the bombing in southern Hama Province (AFP). 
TT
20

Netanyahu’s Messages: Beyond Türkiye, Closer to Tel Aviv

Men inspect the site of an Israeli airstrike on Thursday morning, following the bombing in southern Hama Province (AFP). 
Men inspect the site of an Israeli airstrike on Thursday morning, following the bombing in southern Hama Province (AFP). 

Following a series of intensified Israeli airstrikes on Damascus and the airports in Homs and Hama, as well as a ground incursion into the city of Nawa near Daraa, Israeli officials on Thursday escalated their rhetoric, issuing fresh threats to the Syrian leadership and warning of further military action—this time citing concerns over Turkish military activity in the region.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar voiced particular alarm over Türkiye’s growing role in Syria, Lebanon, and beyond. Speaking at a press conference in Paris, he said: “They are doing everything they can to turn Syria into a Turkish protectorate. That is clearly their intention.”

Defense Minister Israel Katz echoed this sentiment, stating that Israel “will not allow Damascus to become a security threat” to Israel.

Rising Concern Over Türkiye’s Military Footprint in Syria

Military officials in Tel Aviv confirm that Israel sees Türkiye’s growing military presence in Syria as a serious concern. Their fear stems from two key issues: first, Ankara’s reported efforts to rebuild the Syrian army along the lines of its own modernized military model; and second, its apparent goal of establishing a long-term military foothold inside Syrian territory.

Israeli defense sources point out that Türkiye’s armed forces operate based on a traditional ground warfare doctrine, featuring large-scale armored divisions and well-equipped infantry units—similar in style to the Russian military. This stands in contrast to the Israeli military, which relies heavily on air superiority and has long underinvested in ground forces.

Given this disparity, any significant Turkish deployment in Syria could pose a direct challenge to Israeli operations and raise the risk of confrontation.

While the recent Israeli airstrikes targeted mostly long-defunct Syrian military sites—many of which have been hit repeatedly over the years—the attacks signal a broader strategic shift.

In the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led assault on southern Israel, the Israeli military has moved away from a defensive posture of deterrence and containment. In its place, the army has embraced a more aggressive doctrine built around preemptive action.

This shift was further underscored by the appointment of a new chief of staff from the Armored Corps—the first in three decades—signaling a renewed emphasis on ground operations and offensive initiatives.

Not Just a Message to Türkiye

Despite the messaging around Türkiye’s presence, analysts say the recent wave of Israeli military action also serves broader geopolitical aims.

After failing to persuade Washington to pressure Ankara to scale back its involvement in Syria, Israel now appears determined to assert its own red lines militarily. The airstrike on the Scientific Studies and Research Center in Damascus—a facility already destroyed multiple times since 2018—was widely viewed as symbolic.

Israeli officials say the intended audience for that particular strike was Syrian interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, whom Israeli intelligence continues to refer to by his former nom de guerre, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani. By launching the attack during the Eid al-Fitr holiday, Israel aimed to send a clear message: there will be no return to normalcy in Syria without accounting for Israeli interests.

Among those interests is normalization. Last month, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his desire to see Syria and Lebanon join the Abraham Accords and establish formal diplomatic ties with Israel.

Hardline figures within Netanyahu’s coalition believe Israel currently holds a strategic upper hand. As right-wing think tank head Meir Ben-Shabbat recently wrote: “Israel is in its strongest position ever. It is transforming the Middle East, expanding its military capabilities, and pushing back the Iranian axis—while Syria is at its weakest.”

For many in Israel’s ruling right, this is an ideal moment to push for a peace agreement with Syria, possibly even one involving Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights.

The Real Audience: Domestic Israel

Still, perhaps the most significant message behind the military campaign is directed not at Ankara, Damascus, or even Tehran—but at Tel Aviv.

As protests against Netanyahu’s leadership have grown louder in recent months, military escalation has served as a convenient political shield. The wars in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, and Lebanon dominate public attention and have largely sidelined anti-government demonstrations.

“Netanyahu’s government must go, but we won’t take to the streets while our sons are fighting,” has become a common refrain among many Israelis who oppose his leadership but remain reluctant to protest during wartime.

By maintaining a state of conflict, Netanyahu is not only securing his coalition’s survival but also enabling his allies to advance a hardline agenda—particularly on the Palestinian issue—that would have faced greater resistance in peacetime.

Critics warn that this strategy, while politically expedient, comes at a steep cost to Israel’s democratic institutions, its judiciary, and the long-term stability of the region.