Coordinated and high-level political attention is paramount to ending the devastating war in Sudan between Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), according to a British researcher.
As the conflict in Sudan escalates, fears are growing that the country could split into conflicting states under two rival governments.
Rosalind Marsden, a British researcher and diplomat said in a report to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), that 17 months of war in Sudan have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians and displaced 10 million people – 2 million into neighboring countries and 8 million internally.
She said the war has created the world’s worst hunger crisis, pushing millions to the brink of a man-made famine.
Meanwhile, a series of international mediation efforts have failed to stop the conflict.
According to Marsden, the latest was a US-mediated attempt to restart a stalled ceasefire process in mid-August, aiming to bring together senior delegations from the warring parties – the SAF and the RSF.
Talks in Geneva were intended to achieve a nationwide cessation of hostilities, allowing humanitarian access to all areas of the country, and a robust monitoring and verification mechanism, she said.
The negotiations were co-hosted by Saudi Arabia and Switzerland, with the United Nations, African Union, Egypt and the UAE present as observers.
Some limited progress was made on humanitarian access to Darfur. The SAF agreed to temporarily reopen the Adre border crossing from Chad, which they had arbitrarily shut in February and the RSF unblocked the Al Dabbah route.
Failure of ceasefire talks
Marsden said the main reason for failure of the ceasefire talks is that both the SAF and RSF are still pursuing military victory.
The SAF refused to send a delegation to Geneva, setting unrealistic preconditions and objecting to the presence of the UAE, which they accuse of arming the RSF.
That meant mediators had to communicate virtually with SAF representatives, while conducting in-person talks with the RSF, she noted.
Marsden said that although the SAF is losing on the battlefield, it doesn’t want to negotiate from a position of weakness and has intensified aerial bombing since Geneva.
Its leaders hope that more advanced weaponry from Iran, China, Russia and elsewhere will turn the tide.
SAF Commander General Abdel Fatah al Burhan is also under pressure to continue the war from hardcore Islamists, particularly those with ties to Ali Karti, Secretary-General of the Sudan Islamic Movement and formerly foreign minister under the regime of Omar al-Bashir.
Islamist brigades provide manpower for the SAF, and Islamist control of Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has made the SAF’s diplomatic position hostile to progress, she said.
RSF awaits dry season
The RSF, another creation of the Bashir regime, is also hoping to make further territorial gains once the dry season starts in October, according to Marsden.
They have been more cooperative in international forums, using SAF recalcitrance to pose in a positive light, she said.
During the Geneva talks, they agreed to a code of conduct on the protection of civilians, followed by a directive from their commander, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti.
But their commitments are severely undermined by their record of atrocities, including ethnically-targeted killing, and expanding attacks on civilians, according to the British researcher.
She said given this stalemate, more pressure is needed on countries fueling the war through military, financial and logistical support to the belligerents.
The recent renewal of the UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions regime and arms embargo on Darfur, in place since 2005 but never effectively implemented, was a missed opportunity to expand the arms embargo to all of Sudan, given the spread of the conflict and evidence that both warring parties have acquired new weapons from a range of countries.
Robust international action
Marsden said the priority now must be for the UNSC to take more robust action in the face of violations of the existing embargo.
She said sanctions are also needed “against those living in Western democracies who propagate hate speech and call for a continuation of the war.”
At the same time, the US and its partners should continue working with regional actors including Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE to try to leverage their influence on the belligerents and persuade them that everyone loses if the war continues.
In this regard, the newly-formed Aligned for Advancing Liefesaving and Peace in Sudan, which includes the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, the EU and the African Union could be a significant platform.
The high-level segment of the UN General Assembly will also be an important opportunity to reinforce these messages, she said.
Threat of partition
Marsden said Sudan is facing the real possibility of de facto partition under rival governments and even further fragmentation.
An army general recently vowed that it will hold on to power for another 20 years if it wins, while an RSF victory would see the state become a subsidiary of the Dagalo family business empire, she added.
If Sudan’s democracy-supporting civilians want to change these calculations, they need to unite on a common anti-war platform and make their voices central to shaping future peacebuilding efforts, she urged. International support is crucial to enabling that objective.
This means not bestowing legitimacy on either warring party, but elevating the role of civilians in diplomatic initiatives and pressing for a peaceful transition to a democratic, civilian government across the whole country.
If Africa’s third largest country disintegrates, it would have generational impacts for Sudanese. It would also spread instability to its fragile neighbors, and beyond its 800 km Red Sea coastline, Marsden warned.
Sudan can no longer be ignored amidst other global crises. Coordinated and high-level political attention is paramount to ending this devastating war, she demanded.
