The Face of Truth:  U.S. Sanctions: Ripening Ambitions That War Could Not Mature?!

Ibrahim Shglawi

The imposition of U.S. sanctions on General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, Chairman of the Sovereignty Council and Commander-in-Chief of the Sudanese Armed Forces, raises many questions about the significance and timing of this step. While the sanctions appear to target Al-Burhan personally, they essentially aim at Sudan as a state, within a broader context of international interventions seeking to control the country’s political and economic trajectory. In this article, we will discuss the implications of these sanctions, Sudan’s opportunities, and the actions needed to mitigate their effects. Sanctions on the head of state are sanctions on the entire nation and represent part of a long history of international interventions aiming to impose agendas on Sudan, dating back to the pre-independence era.

Since the outbreak of the Southern war in 1955 until the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972, Sudan has suffered from international pressures designed to steer it toward specific choices, often conflicting with its national interests. This era witnessed the opening of credit lines for developmental projects, leading to a severe economic crisis and continuous borrowing that Sudan could not repay. The result was a country drowning in debt and burdened by conflicts. This pattern continued through the 1990s and 2000s, with sanctions imposed on Sudan, culminating in South Sudan’s secession in 2011—a chapter that cannot be separated from international plans to deplete the country’s resources and undermine its sovereignty.

Thus, any sanctions imposed on Sudan, especially at this time, remain part of the ongoing targeting of the country’s wealth and resources. These sanctions aim to ripen a reality that war could not achieve, as international powers exploit internal crises to craft policies that bolster external influence at the expense of national will.

Sanctions and the Context of War

It is essential to link these sanctions to the ongoing conflict in Sudan. The Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which have received backing from regional and international powers, represent a facade for demographic and economic changes serving foreign agendas. While the U.S. labels the RSF as war criminals, the sanctions reveal a clear contradiction in its policies by targeting those fighting the militia instead of supporting them, especially as Al-Burhan is implementing his people’s will to achieve liberation and restore security and peace.

One of the main dimensions of these sanctions lies in the U.S. administration relying on false reports and inaccurate information provided by parties hostile to the government and Sudanese Armed Forces. These reports ignored the RSF’s crimes, including systematic destruction and humanitarian violations, and instead focused on blaming the Sudanese army for the crisis.

Geopolitical Dimensions

The timing of these sanctions reflects complex developments, including:

The escalating repercussions of the war that erupted in April 2023 between the Armed Forces and the RSF following the latter’s attempted coup.

International powers exploiting crises as tools for economic and political intervention to serve their interests.

Geopolitical shifts, particularly Al-Burhan’s efforts to strengthen ties with Russia and China, which threaten U.S. interests in the region.

As a result, these sanctions are a pressure tool to deter Al-Burhan from pursuing this path. According to experts, such sanctions harm Sudan’s international standing, turning the state into a hostage to the dictates of major powers, thus reproducing the experience of sanctions on President Al-Bashir and their devastating effects on the Sudanese state.

Opportunities at Hand

1. Strengthening Internal Unity:
The sanctions provide Al-Burhan with an opportunity to enhance his domestic popularity, as they are seen as unjust measures punishing Sudan for confronting rebellion.

2. Diplomatic Mobilization:
Sudan must launch diplomatic efforts globally and regionally to avoid political isolation while learning from past sanctions that hurt the Sudanese people more than they impacted leadership.

3. Diversifying Alliances:
The sanctions underscore the importance of adopting a new approach that strengthens internal unity and develops strategic partnerships with neutral international powers, such as Russia and China.

Conclusion

The international context reveals deeper motives than merely targeting Al-Burhan. The U.S. and its allies aim to control Sudan’s resources and prevent any attempts at political or economic independence. These sanctions highlight the need to bolster national will, establish a unifying project that protects the country from external interference, and ensures its stability and sovereignty.

Wishing you all well and good health.
Sunday, January 19, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com