The game of biting fingers between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi.. Who screamed first?

Phone call … Qualitative development

By: Al-Rekabi Hassan Yagoub

The telephone call between the President of the Sovereignty Council in Sudan, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, and Mohamed bin Zayed, President of the UAE , last week represented a qualitative development in the relations between Sudan and the UAE, which witnessed great tension and escalation since April 15th 2023 due to the latter’s support for the rebel Militia, so-called Rapid Support Forces (RSF) which fired the first bullet that day towards the General Command of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) in an attempt to seize power by force in Sudan, the tension between the two countries reached the peak point when Sudan lodged a formal complaint against the UAE in the UNSC last March, including strong evidence and findings indicating Abu Dhabi’s support for the rebel RSF , calling on the UNSC to condemn the UAE’s aggressive acts against Sudan , and implement its legal mechanisms to stop it . But the UAE denied the allegations through its representative to the United Nations, who described the accusations contained in the complaint as false.
*Obstacles to Sudan’s complaint*.

The UAE has repeatedly tried to put obstacles to Sudan’s complaint and prevent it from reaching its ends in the corridors of the Security Council, these obstacles were revealed by the Sudanese Foreign Ministry stating that Britain intervened at the behest of the UAE to convert a meeting of the UNSC that was set to deliberation on Sudan’s complaint against the UAE into a closed session of the members of the Council, which deprived the Sudanese representative from attending the session, as in accordance with Article 27 of the rules of procedure of the Council does not allow the participation of delegates in closed meetings other than the member states of the Council.

*Sudan’s insistence on complaint has shifted the UAE’s stance from denial to a sense of danger*.

With Sudan’s insistence on moving forward in enforcing its complaint and after hard efforts made by Sudan’s representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Al-Harith Idris, Sudan’s complaint and the irrefutable evidence it contained against the UAE were officially adopted by the UNSC on the twentieth of last June, and this was a qualitative event that transferred the UAE’s position from the square of denial, to the square of sense of danger . This development has been accompanied by pressure from Western powers on Abu Dhabi to stop providing support to the RSF after many reports from international humanitarian and legal organizations of mass violations, atrocities and crimes against humanity committed by the RSF against innocent civilians.
*The military position on the ground led to the failure of Abu Dhabi’s plots*.

The military position on the ground indicates that the military balance of power between SAF and the RSF is in favor of SAF and that the RSF Militia has been receiving successive defeats on all combat axes and has become like ashes vanished by the wind on a stormy day and they are unable to do anything to hold new sites and cities, and that its field military commanders have become an easy catch for SAF fire . Moreover , the civilian arm of the RSF , so-called The Sudanese Coordination of Civil Democratic Forces (SCCDF) headed by Abdalla Hamadok is unable to present itself as an acceptable civilian political entity on the political life in Sudan the day after the war due to its organic ties with the RSF.
All these factors led to the weakening of the position of Abu Dhabi, which bet on the militia horse to achieve its unknown and mysterious goals that lies in a deep corner in the mind of the decision maker in the UAE who financed and devoted its political, diplomatic, and military resources to achieve them, but failed and vanished into the winds.
*The game of biting fingers.. Who screamed first*?

The confrontation between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi, which lasted since April 15th 2023, can be likened to the game of (biting fingers), which takes place between two opponents, each opponent bites the other’s finger and the one who screams of pain first is the loser, although this game does not already exist like other violent sports, but it is a metaphor for the state of feeling severe pain , but each one betting that his opponent is in more pain waiting him to scream and surrender.
The game of biting fingers has already ended between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi with a loud scream launched by the latter. That is why the Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s plane landed the next day on the tarmac of Port Sudan airport two weeks ago, as a messenger sent by Abu Dhabi seeking reconciliation with Khartoum under cover of settlement of the file of bilateral relations between Addis Ababa and Khartoum, as this would not have been done directly in order to alleviate the bitterness of the defeat .
Abu Dhabi screamed first because of Khartoum’s steadfastness, fortitude, and patience . Khartoum has a glorious civilizational precedent, a long historical heritage, and honorable fighting legacy, SAF would not have collapsed or lifting white flag in front of a brutal enemy that fights for money , and by proxy, attacks innocent civilians , children, women, and elderly people. When Lieutenant General Yasser Al-Atta, Assistant Commander-in-Chief of SAF and a member of the Sovereignty Council said, “we will fight even if the war lasts a hundred years”, he meant to send a message to Abu Dhabi that “we wouldn’t scream first”. I think Abu Dhabi picked the message! .
*What should be Sudan’s position in possible talks with Abu Dhabi*?

*Firstly* : The Sudanese negotiator must come to the table with a back mind that the other side is deceitful, evasive, and volatile until proven the opposite.
*Secondly*: Sudan’s position should be based on a firm desire – but with no rush – to repair what has been damaged and build normal relations on the principle of equality, mutual respect and commitment to non-interference in the internal affairs of the other party and to upgrade and develop bilateral relations in a way that preserves the common interests between the two countries.
*Thirdly*: Calling on Abu Dhabi in obvious and explicit terms to stop all forms of support for the RSF and its political arm SCCDF.
*Fourthly*: Rejecting the inclusion of any negotiating agenda related to the future of the RSF and SCCDF in the upcoming political scene in Sudan, or any demand to reduce roles of any other Sudanese political entities, as this is at the core of Sudan’s internal affairs.
*Fifthly*: Proceed with pushing Sudan’s complaint in its legal path to the Security Council and not responding to any requests to suspend or withdraw it, even if they come from mediators and friends of Sudan, unless Abu Dhabi takes clear practical steps in the path of stopping its support for the RSF and SCCDF.
*Sixthly*: Sudan has nothing to offer Abu Dhabi in return for its commitment to stop its support for both RSF and SCCDF, as this is not a favor, but a natural right to Sudan.
*Seventhly*: Not to accept any form of gifts, funds and compensations or promises thereof except within the framework of a documented agreement witnessed by international guarantors.
The victory achieved by SAF on the ground must be reflected completely at the negotiating table, so it is not reasonable to win in the battlefield and then waste this victory at the negotiating table. It is necessary to be loyal to the martyrs who gave their lives for the sake of the homeland and the people and to preserve the dignity of the Sudanese nation, and loyalty to them can only be done by achieving the goals for which they sacrificed, which is an imposition duty to be performed, and a responsibility must be shouldered by every authentic Sudanese citizen .