Sudan war exposes deep roots of racism blocking path to peace

By Trayo A. Ali

Racism, manifested through discriminatory practices and hate speech, has remained one of the most enduring features of Sudan’s conflict. To varying degrees, it has contributed to the entrenchment of cultural marginalization, unequal access to political power, inequitable distribution of wealth, and structural weaknesses within state institutions. Yet, particularly amid the ongoing war, this dimension has not received the attention it deserves in political analyses and peace initiatives, which have largely focused on the conflict’s immediate manifestations rather than its deeper structural foundations. Consequently, racism continues to exist as a latent force within Sudanese society, capable of re-emerging whenever the state enters a new crisis. Addressing this dimension is therefore indispensable to any serious effort to achieve sustainable peace.

This argument does not suggest that racism is the sole explanation for Sudan’s conflict. Rather, it rests on the premise that while other drivers of conflict—such as competition for political power, marginalization, economic crises, and external intervention—have varied in their nature and intensity over time, the factor rooted in ethnic divisions and expressed through racist practices and discriminatory discourse has remained the most enduring. The issue is not ethnic diversity itself, but the manner in which ethnic identities have interacted with the distribution of political power and economic resources, the formation of governing elites, and the definition of citizenship. In doing so, questions of identity have become embedded in the political structure of the Sudanese state rather than merely reflecting it.

The current war has exposed this dimension with unprecedented clarity. Hate speech has intensified, classifications based on origin and identity have become increasingly widespread, and identity has frequently been transformed into a tool for political and social mobilization and polarization. This does not mean that ethnicity alone caused the war. Rather, ethnic divisions created a conducive environment for the expansion of violence when combined with struggles over political power, economic collapse, and external intervention. The relationship among these factors is therefore one of mutual reinforcement, with each amplifying the effects of the others.

Racism is by no means a recent phenomenon in Sudan. Its roots extend back to the eras of slavery and the slave trade, and its legacy persisted during the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium. One notable example is the Memorandum of the Sayyids (1925), which the Sudanese scholar Mohammed Ibrahim Nugud, in his book Slavery Relations in Sudanese Society, described as an objection to the dismantling of the institution of slavery and a defence of the continuation of relations of servitude and dependency. The legacy of this history continued to shape Sudanese political life. Among its most notable manifestations were statements attributed to former President General Omar al-Bashir that contained derogatory remarks about women from western Sudan, as well as the public celebrations organized by the late Al-Tayeb Mustafa following the secession of South Sudan. Today, such rhetoric has reached unprecedented levels in the digital sphere, where it is propagated by certain platforms and accounts associated with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), as well as by the separatist current led by the figure known as “Amsib” and by individuals and organizations that support him. Their discourse is grounded in racial discrimination, particularly against Sudan’s African communities.

It is equally important to note that while hate speech constitutes an explicit pillar of the discourse promoted by the “Amsib” movement, the leadership of the Rapid Support Forces has failed to restrain—or has chosen to overlook—the racist rhetoric disseminated by some of its supporters and fighters. This has contributed to its normalization and wider circulation. Racism has therefore ceased to be merely a historical legacy; it has become an instrument of political mobilization and polarization in the current conflict, further diminishing the prospects for a comprehensive national settlement.

Accordingly, any project aimed at building sustainable peace in Sudan will remain fundamentally incomplete if it is confined to power-sharing arrangements or security agreements without confronting the historical legacy that has shaped relations among Sudan’s diverse social communities. Rebuilding the Sudanese state requires more than institutional reform. It demands the consolidation of equal citizenship, the rule of law, justice in the distribution of power and resources, and mutual recognition among all Sudanese, regardless of ethnic origin or identity. It also requires acknowledging racism as a central structural dimension of the conflict and addressing it accordingly. Unless this deep-rooted problem is confronted directly, the outward manifestations of Sudan’s crises may change, but their underlying causes will continue to reproduce themselves from one generation to the next.