Is it time for the international community to take sides in Sudan?

With the bloody crisis in Sudan now in its third month and with no sign that either party is close to securing a decisive military victory, worst-case scenarios for the strategic African country are already unfolding.

The war between the Sudanese national army led by Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces led by his bitter rival Gen. Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo is now spreading beyond the capital Khartoum and its twin sister, Omdurman. Neither side has been able to take full control of the capital and nearby urban centers. The fact that the regular army has failed to repulse the lightly armed RSF, at least from Khartoum, has baffled observers.

It is not clear how the conflict erupted, with each side blaming the other. Al-Burhan claims that Dagalo was not happy with the framework agreement that was supposed to come into effect in early April because it stipulated that the RSF be merged into the army, thus denying him control of his own militia, which he used as a mercenary organ to engage in military adventures outside Sudan. In addition, it would have ended his control over illicit gold mining activities in the country itself.

On the other hand, Dagalo, who was Al-Burhan’s deputy in the Transitional Sovereignty Council, blames his former partner for staging a coup against the civilians in the government and forcing a military confrontation after it became clear that Muslim Brotherhood leaders and remnants of the former Omar Bashir regime were calling the shots in the armed forces.

Dagalo and Al-Burhan were both instrumental in supporting the regime of former dictator Bashir for many years and together they toppled the civilian government in an October 2021 coup.

With a military and political impasse kicking in, the humanitarian catastrophe is spreading. More than 2.5 million people have been displaced, with thousands of others seeking refuge in neighboring countries. So far, more than 2,000 people have been killed, but that number is likely to rise in the coming days.

Entire districts of Khartoum no longer have running water or electricity and many hospitals have been taken out of service. Relief efforts have stalled and a political settlement remains elusive as the two sides continue to breach the short-term truce deals mediated by Saudi Arabia and the US.

Multiple reports speak of atrocities being committed against civilians, including gang rapes, summary killings and ethnic cleansing. The situation in Darfur is especially dire, with reports that Arab militiamen associated with the Janjaweed, a precursor to the RSF, are attacking non-Arab villages and committing atrocities that are triggering sectarian and ethnic strife.

El Geneina in Darfur has already been declared a disaster area by the UN and local officials. On June 14, the governor of West Darfur was killed, allegedly by militiamen loyal to Dagalo, after he described the violence in Darfur as genocide.

Some reports have accused the army of committing murder as well. But the fact that Darfur is traditionally known as a tribal base for Dagalo shifts attention to the bloody history of the Janjaweed in that province.

A civil war is not far-fetched, while fears that some provinces might seek to separate cannot be discounted.

Osama Al-Sharif

The International Crisis Group last week reported that “the conflict is spreading outside the capital, plunging other areas into horrendous and, in some cases, inter-ethnic bloodletting. Darfur, long a tinderbox, has exploded into fighting along ethnic lines, with dozens killed and tens of thousands uprooted from their homes.”

The chaos created by the war and the tensions it is causing among tribes is reviving attempts by separatist groups in other parts of the country. Reports suggest there are at least 80 armed movements in Sudan, with some taking up arms again against the central government.

On Monday, it was reported that the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North fighters  attacked army bases in the Blue Nile and South Kordofan states, inflicting heavy losses. The army said it had repulsed such attacks, but the development is serious since this group had signed a peace agreement with Khartoum. The rebel movement is led by Abdulaziz Al-Hilu and includes tens of thousands of men with access to heavy weapons. Residents said it was not yet clear what position Al-Hilu might take in the conflict, but the buildup of his forces raises fears of further clashes.

With both sides refusing to negotiate, Sudan is quickly descending into uncertainty. A civil war is not far-fetched, while fears that some provinces might seek to separate cannot be discounted. Furthermore, the power vacuum will entice religious extremist groups to emerge — a development that is of concern to Sudan’s neighbors, especially Egypt. On this subject, the International Crisis Group said that “such a war would likely splinter the country, devastating the population, while creating a haven for … militants, mercenaries and traffickers, who in turn could bedevil the Sahel, the Horn of Africa and the Mediterranean and Red Sea basins for years to come.”

The war in Sudan is proving to be both complex and multilayered, with multiple actors, including outside powers, and motivations involved. The stakes include the bitter struggle for political power, resource control and deep ethnic and religious divisions. Beyond the immediate fallout, there is also the long-term humanitarian catastrophe and regional instability.
Like all regional crises, various countries have adopted conflicting views on what is going on and some have taken sides as well. Some countries, like China and Russia, are supporting the Sudanese government, while others, including some Gulf countries, have historical links to rebel groups and the RSF. Others have taken a more neutral stance — for now.

What matters now is to save the territorial and political integrity of Sudan, which remains a country rich in natural resources, while its stability is geopolitically vital for the Red Sea basin, the Horn of Africa and the entire continent. For now, the lesser of two evils would seem to be to back the national army to extend its authority over the entire country, while empowering regional and international bodies to prevent the further internationalization of the crisis. Only then can a political settlement be reached. A defeat of the national army would sink Sudan into a black hole.