Coordinated pressure is needed to prevent the Sudan’s fragmentation

International cooperation is needed to deliver civilian protection, scale up humanitarian assistance, leverage the influence of regional actors, and give Sudanese civilians a role in the peace process.

Dame Rosalind Marsden*

A series of international mediation efforts have failed to stop the conflict. 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 Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (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. The negotiations were co-hosted by Saudi Arabia and Switzerland, with the UN, AU, 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.

UN trucks are now getting into Darfur, though onward movement beyond West Darfur is severely hampered by heavy rains and the collapse of the only bridge linking the Chad border to South and Central Darfur.

But since the talks ended, fighting has escalated.

The warring parties are not ready for a ceasefire

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.

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.

The RSF, another creation of the Bashir regime, is also hoping to make further territorial gains once the dry season starts in October. They have been more cooperative in international forums, using SAF recalcitrance to pose in a positive light.

During the Geneva talks, they agreed to a code of conduct on 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.

The way forward

Given this stalemate, more pressure is needed on countries fuelling 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.

The priority now must be for the UNSC to take more robust action in the face of violations of the existing embargo. Sanctions are also needed against those living in Western democracies who propagate hate speech and call for a continuation of the war.

To change the calculations of the generals, action should be taken to dismantle Sudan’s kleptocratic networks, including by imposing more sanctions on those individuals who facilitate the business conglomerates that fund the war. The trade in Sudanese gold, most of which flows through Dubai and is the main source of revenue for both warring parties, deserves particular attention.

At the same time, the US and its partners should continue working with regional actors including Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia 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 Lifesaving and Peace in Sudan (ALPS) could be a significant platform. The high-level segment of the UN General Assembly will also be an important opportunity to reinforce these messages.

Impunity and civilian protection

Impunity for those responsible for past atrocities, exemplified by the failure to hand Bashir over to the International Criminal Court, is one reason why grave human rights violations continue on both sides. Many atrocities amount to international crimes according to the UN’s Independent Fact-Finding Mission.

The UK played a leading role in establishing the Mission and is currently pressing for renewal of its mandate in the Human Rights Council, a move being strongly resisted by the SAF.

Humanitarian assistance must be scaled up, but practical measures to protect civilians are also urgently needed. One option is for UN-backed African military observers to support local ceasefires. In June, both the UNSC and the AU Peace and Security Council commissioned work on options for protecting civilians, and their recommendations are urgently awaited.

The scale of protection needs on the ground is unprecedented but, given current UN Security Council dynamics, it will not be easy to deploy an international force to safeguard civilians. The SAF claims to be Sudan’s legitimate government and is likely to immediately reject any force as undermining its sovereignty.

It will also continue to insist it has the right to decide where humanitarian aid can be distributed. The UN has acquiesced in this claim despite the SAF’s part in the military coup against the civilian-led transitional government in October 2021.

The threat of partition

Sudan is facing the real possibility of de facto partition under rival governments and even further fragmentation. A SAF general recently vowed that the army will hold on to power for another 20 years if it wins. An RSF victory would see the state become a subsidiary of the Dagalo family business empire.

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. 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 neighbours, and beyond its 800 km Red Sea coastline.

Sudan can no longer be ignored amidst other global crises. Coordinated and high-level political attention is paramount to ending this devastating war.

*Dame Rosalind Marsden is a distinguished former diplomat who served as the British Ambassador to Sudan and later as the EU Special Representative for Sudan.