Al-Burhan, Hemedti: From Friends to Foes, the Rift That Ignited Sudan

The leaders of the army, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left), and the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), in 2019. (AFP)
The leaders of the army, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left), and the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), in 2019. (AFP)
TT

Al-Burhan, Hemedti: From Friends to Foes, the Rift That Ignited Sudan

The leaders of the army, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left), and the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), in 2019. (AFP)
The leaders of the army, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left), and the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), in 2019. (AFP)

A saying among Sudanese military circles warns that camaraderie can swiftly turn to conflict when interests clash. This rings true for Lt. Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Lieutenant General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as “Hemedti.”
Since mid-April, the once-close allies have been locked in a bitter feud, hurling insults and threats at each other.
How did their friendship sour, and why did it degenerate into hostility?
From Brothers-in-Arms to Enemies: The Rift That Shattered Friendship
After two decades of military camaraderie, the friendship between al-Burhan and Hemedti crumbled as they competed for power. What was once a strong bond deteriorated, leading to gunfire and warfare, destroying everything in its wake.
Today, the two men continue to clash, leaving Sudan and its people in turmoil.
Hemedti, in an earlier interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, recounted his journey from a “merchant” to joining the Border Guard Forces during the war in Darfur. It was during this time, under the command of al-Burhan, that they first met.
Retired Col. Tayeb al-Malikabi confirmed that the relationship between the two men began in Darfur.
At the time, al-Burhan served as a local commissioner in Nierteti, while Hemedti was in the Border Guard Forces, which later became the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), al-Malikabi told Asharq Al-Awsat.
According to al-Malikabi, Hemedti played a significant role in the war against armed movements in Darfur.
In 2007, former President Omar al-Bashir appointed him as a colonel and placed him under the General Intelligence Service.
In 2013, al-Bashir restructured these forces, naming them the RSF under Hemedti’s command, granting him extensive powers and privileges. Al-Bashir suspected the former head of the General Intelligence Service, Salah Abdullah “Gosh,” of involvement in a coup attempt.
The former president then capitalized on the moment, placing the freshly formed RSF directly under his authority as President and Army Commander. This gave them more independence in their operations.
Their leader, Hemedti, earned the nickname “protector” for his suggested role as a safeguard against coups.
Yemen War
Al-Burhan and Hemedti’s alliance grew stronger in 2015 when they backed Yemen’s government. They teamed up to train fighters from the RSF and the army for “Operation Decisive Storm” mounted by the Saudi-led Arab coalition against insurgents in Yemen.
In 2017, Sudan’s Parliament passed a law recognizing the RSF as an independent military force. Despite being officially under army command, they effectively answered directly to the President and Army Commander-in-Chief, operating as his personal forces.
Ousting Ibn Auf, Installing al-Burhan
When the people’s revolt against the Islamist regime erupted in December 2018, the RSF were deployed to quell the uprising. However, according to earlier statements to the Asharq Al-Awsat, Hemedti asserted that he summoned his forces to support the revolution, not to attack the rebels.
He took a different stance from his boss, protecting the protesters, amidst speculation that al-Bashir had ordered him to crush the rebels, even if it resulted in the deaths of many.
Hemedti, whose forces almost took control of Khartoum, played a key role in ousting al-Bashir’s government, along with junior army officers. This led to the resignation of Lt. Gen. Awad Ibn Auf after one day in power due to public pressure.
Afterward, al-Burhan was chosen to lead the transitional military council, with Hemedti as his deputy.
This reunited the two men, as described by retired Brigadier Kamal Ismail, who said they formed a strong bond through joint military operations in Darfur.
"Hemedti and al-Burhan met in Darfur, where they formed a very strong relationship through joint military operations,” Ismail told Asharq Al-Awsat.
“Having two commanders requires tight military coordination, mutual trust, and a strong bond. When Hemedti became the leader of the RSF, their relationship grew even stronger,” he added.
According to Ismail, Hemedti cleared the path for al-Burhan, who was the army’s Inspector General, to become its leader.
This strengthened their relationship further. Al-Burhan then appointed Hemedti as his deputy in the transitional military council. Together, they worked to remove opponents from the security committee, including Gosh.
Breaking up the General Command Sit-In
Ismail reveals that the bond between the two men hit a snag during the dispersal of the General Command Sit-In. While both parties agreed on the move, Hemedti felt he was unfairly linked to it due to involvement of soldiers wearing RSF uniforms. This led to some tension.
Hemedti had previously mentioned feeling implicated in the dispersal and blamed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood within the army and security forces.
However, tensions eased after Hemedti was tasked with leading negotiations between the military and civilians. He also played a significant role in signing the Constitutional Document and handling peace negotiations with armed groups.
Despite this, disputes resurfaced within the Transitional Sovereignty Council, causing strain in the relationship between the two men.
Ismail believes the root of the tension lies in the competition for power between the two leaders.
Eyewitness reports suggest that the relationship between al-Burhan and Hemedti depended on their interactions with civilians in the transitional government.
When tensions rose between the military and civilians, the two men grew closer, culminating in the October 2021 coup that removed the civilian government.
“Al-Burhan and Hemedti were completely aligned in supporting the coup due to their deteriorating relationship with civilians,” emphasized Ismail.
Coup’s Pitfall
Shortly after the coup, Hemedti felt he was being lured into a new trap, as revealed by his brother, Abdul Rahim Dagalo, the second-in-command of the RSF.
Dagalo mentioned that they realized the coup’s failure early on, which allowed Islamists to regain power.
“Hemedti told al-Burhan about receiving wrong reports from security agencies and asked him to dismiss the intelligence chief, Jamal Abdel Majid, the police chief, and the army chief of staff,” revealed Ismail.
Ismail also explained that while al-Burhan removed the police chief and intelligence director, he avoided ousting the army chief of staff to prevent internal military issues.
Hemedti distanced himself from the coup early on. His deputy attempted to reinstate Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok in November 2021, but al-Burhan remained committed to the coup despite failing to form a government as promised.
Hamdok’s attempted return was rejected by political circles and the “Forces of Freedom and Change” (FFC) alliance, leading to his resignation.
As per Ismail, clashes between the two leaders were inevitable, given their political ambitions.
Political thinker Haji Warraq foresaw conflicts between them, highlighting the military institution’s internal disputes as a major concern.
On December 5, 2022, the two leaders admitted their failed coup attempt and signed an agreement with the civilian FFC alliance to bring back civilian rule, unify the army, and keep the military out of politics.
However, they later clashed over how long it would take to merge the RSF into the army and who would lead the unified forces during the transition.
“Their disagreement escalated, turning them from allies to enemies. It was expected because their relationship was based on interests, not principles. Having two armies in a country always threatens stability,” explained Ismail.
Supporters of the former president saw an opportunity in the growing discord between the leaders and worked to widen the gap between them.
“Some saw the disagreement between the leaders as a chance to spark conflict,” said Ismail.



What to Know about the Ceasefire Deal between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah

People gather as cars drive past rubble from damaged buildings in Beirut's southern suburbs, after a ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed group Hezbollah took effect at 0200 GMT on Wednesday after US President Joe Biden said both sides accepted an agreement brokered by the United States and France, in Lebanon, November 27, 2024. REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
People gather as cars drive past rubble from damaged buildings in Beirut's southern suburbs, after a ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed group Hezbollah took effect at 0200 GMT on Wednesday after US President Joe Biden said both sides accepted an agreement brokered by the United States and France, in Lebanon, November 27, 2024. REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
TT

What to Know about the Ceasefire Deal between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah

People gather as cars drive past rubble from damaged buildings in Beirut's southern suburbs, after a ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed group Hezbollah took effect at 0200 GMT on Wednesday after US President Joe Biden said both sides accepted an agreement brokered by the United States and France, in Lebanon, November 27, 2024. REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
People gather as cars drive past rubble from damaged buildings in Beirut's southern suburbs, after a ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed group Hezbollah took effect at 0200 GMT on Wednesday after US President Joe Biden said both sides accepted an agreement brokered by the United States and France, in Lebanon, November 27, 2024. REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir

A ceasefire deal that went into effect on Wednesday could end more than a year of cross-border fighting between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah militant group, raising hopes and renewing difficult questions in a region gripped by conflict.
The US- and France-brokered deal, approved by Israel late Tuesday, calls for an initial two-month halt to fighting and requires Hezbollah to end its armed presence in southern Lebanon, while Israeli troops are to return to their side of the border. It offers both sides an off-ramp from hostilities that have driven more than 1.2 million Lebanese and 50,000 Israelis from their homes.
An intense bombing campaign by Israel has left more than 3,700 people dead, many of them civilians, Lebanese officials say. Over 130 people have been killed on the Israeli side.
But while it could significantly calm the tensions that have inflamed the region, the deal does little directly to resolve the much deadlier war that has raged in Gaza since the Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023 that killed 1,200 people.
Hezbollah, which began firing scores of rockets into Israel the following day in support of Hamas, previously said it would keep fighting until there was a stop to the fighting in Gaza. With the new cease-fire, it has backed away from that pledge, in effect leaving Hamas isolated and fighting a war alone.
Here’s what to know about the tentative ceasefire agreement and its potential implications:
The terms of the deal
The agreement reportedly calls for a 60-day halt in fighting that would see Israeli troops retreat to their side of the border while requiring Hezbollah to end its armed presence in a broad swath of southern Lebanon. President Joe Biden said Tuesday that the deal is set to take effect at 4 a.m. local time on Wednesday (9 p.m. EST Tuesday).
Under the deal, thousands of Lebanese troops and U.N. peacekeepers are to deploy to the region south of the Litani River. An international panel led by the US would monitor compliance by all sides. Biden said the deal “was designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities.”
Israel has demanded the right to act should Hezbollah violate its obligations, but Lebanese officials rejected writing that into the proposal. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that the military would strike Hezbollah if the UN peacekeeping force, known as UNIFIL, does not enforce the deal.
Lingering uncertainty
Hezbollah indicated it would give the ceasefire pact a chance, but one of the group's leaders said the group's support for the deal hinged on clarity that Israel would not renew its attacks.
“After reviewing the agreement signed by the enemy government, we will see if there is a match between what we stated and what was agreed upon by the Lebanese officials,” Mahmoud Qamati, deputy chair of Hezbollah’s political council, told the Qatari satellite news network Al Jazeera.
“We want an end to the aggression, of course, but not at the expense of the sovereignty of the state” of Lebanon, he said.
The European Union’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said Tuesday that Israel’s security concerns had been addressed in the deal.
Where the fighting has left both sides After months of cross-border bombings, Israel can claim major victories, including the killing of Hezbollah’s top leader, Hassan Nasrallah, most of his senior commanders and the destruction of extensive militant infrastructure.
A complex attack in September involving the explosion of hundreds of walkie-talkies and pagers used by Hezbollah was widely attributed to Israel, signaling a remarkable penetration of the militant group.
The damage inflicted on Hezbollah has hit not only in its ranks, but the reputation it built by fighting Israel to a stalemate in the 2006 war. Still, its fighters managed to put up heavy resistance on the ground, slowing Israel’s advance while continuing to fire scores of rockets, missiles and drones across the border each day.
The ceasefire offers relief to both sides, giving Israel’s overstretched army a break and allowing Hezbollah leaders to tout the group’s effectiveness in holding their ground despite Israel’s massive advantage in weaponry. But the group is likely to face a reckoning, with many Lebanese accusing it of tying their country’s fate to Gaza’s at the service of key ally Iran, inflicting great damage on a Lebanese economy that was already in grave condition.
No answers for Gaza Until now, Hezbollah has insisted that it would only halt its attacks on Israel when it agreed to stop fighting in Gaza. Some in the region are likely to view a deal between the Lebanon-based group and Israel as a capitulation.
In Gaza, where officials say the war has killed more than 44,000 Palestinians, Israel’s attacks have inflicted a heavy toll on Hamas, including the killing of the group’s top leaders. But Hamas fighters continue to hold scores of Israeli hostages, giving the militant group a bargaining chip if indirect ceasefire negotiations resume.
Hamas is likely to continue to demand a lasting truce and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in any such deal, while Netanyahu on Tuesday reiterated his pledge to continue the war until Hamas is destroyed and all hostages are freed.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose forces were ousted from Gaza by Hamas in 2007 and who hopes to one day rule over the territory again as part of an independent Palestinian state, offered a pointed reminder Tuesday of the intractability of the war, demanding urgent international intervention.
“The only way to halt the dangerous escalation we are witnessing in the region, and maintain regional and international stability, security and peace, is to resolve the question of Palestine,” he said in a speech to the UN read by his ambassador.