The Sudanese government’s announcement that it would relocate its operations to Khartoum suggests that the country has entered into a new phase of recovery. It is not a merely symbolic measure but a step that reflects a genuine shift toward reviving the heart of Sudan.
Khartoum was rendered an open field of destruction after the war broke out: institutions collapsed, the wheels of the economy ground to a halt, and millions of residents were displaced. However, the question today is: how long will people wait before returning to their homes and contributing to the reconstruction of their country?
The government’s return to Khartoum sends a clear message: the capital is back and waiting for its people to return. Cities can only be rebuilt by the efforts of their people. They are rebuilt by the presence of their residents, the restoration of homes and neighborhoods, the return of employees, vibrant schools, universities, and markets.
Khartoum is not a city without hope for a decent life; it has long been the economic heart of Sudan. It is home to over 60 percent of the country’s non-extractive GDP. It is where banks and financial institutions were managed, large companies and factories operated, and commercial and service activities were concentrated. It is also the country’s main transportation hub: its airport, road network, and railways. The paralysis of Khartoum effectively entails the paralysis of Sudan as a whole.
For months now, we have been seeing videos of markets reopening, transportation moving again, and merchants calling on citizens to return. These clips are not state propaganda; they reflect a simple fact: the economy does not recover with time but with people. It can only recover once they return and go back to their lives in their capital.
Here the question becomes more direct: what does people’s return to their homes actually mean?
It means greater security because inhabited neighborhoods are less vulnerable to crime. It means an economy that moves instead of stagnation and dependence on remittances and aid. It means that money wasted on exorbitant rents and other expenses can instead be spent inside the country, revitalizing markets and creating jobs. It also means easing the enormous burdens that have been placed on the shoulders of Sudanese expatriates who, since the outbreak of the war, have borne the responsibility of supporting entire extended families in a protracted struggle for survival, which has taken a toll both psychologically and financially.
It is understandable for those whose work, studies, or medical treatment require it to remain abroad. However, it is difficult for those who have no work nor stability, living under harsh living conditions in exile, to justify their decision to avoid returning. What are they waiting for? Foreign aid? Reconstruction managed from abroad? This is an illusion. No donor will come to rebuild homes, clean them, and equip them, then invite their owners to move back in. Reconstruction begins when land and home owners return to them.
Moreover, continuing to rely on the generosity of host countries is not wise. A commendable and appreciated humanitarian impulse compelled these countries to open their doors, but they did not do so planning to carry this burden indefinitely or become alternative homelands.
The most difficult reports are those about the deaths of growing numbers of Sudanese citizens in areas of refuge, and the purchase of land for their graves in exile. This is not a marginal phenomenon; it raises the alarm about the cost of life in exile.
Khartoum is rising again. Slowly, yes, and it is undeniably struggling to get back on its feet, but it is returning. The state is taking serious steps to restore security, services, electricity, hospitals, and schools. However arduous, returning remains more dignified than a life of waiting without hope.
Last month, the International Organization for Migration confirmed that the number of refugees and internally displaced persons returning has risen to more than three million people, with around one million of them returning to Khartoum. It reported that 68 percent of them have settled in homes that had not been damaged, while 21 percent returned to houses that were partially damaged.
In moments like these, making excuses is not enough. Anyone who can return but chooses to stay away and remain helpless is perpetuating the crisis, burdening those who have already sacrificed enough, and betraying a homeland that is waiting to be rebuilt by its people.
Khartoum will not return through nostalgia alone. It can only return through daily actions by people who have decided to set hesitation aside. Returning does not require denying difficulties nor minimizing suffering; it is an acknowledgment of a simple fact: no one will rebuild homes but their owners, and no one will revive cities on behalf of their people. Waiting in exile, especially for those without work or stability, is not a safer but. It is a decision to accumulate losses, deplete savings, and erode one’s dignity.
Khartoum is not the city it had been at the height of the war, but it has not fully recovered either. The city is halfway there, and it is in such moments that cities need their people most. Recovery does not begin after services are fully restored; it begins so that they are restored. Security improves through people, the economy revives through movement, and the state regains its authority when life returns to its streets and institutions.
Whoever has the ability to return but chooses to remain and wait, is achieving nothing and merely delaying everyone’s recovery for everyone.
