The Truth Perspective: Sudan: A Race of Initiatives?!
Ibrahim Shglawi
Sudan is at a critical historical crossroads, where political and military crises intertwine with regional and international interventions. Recently, developments have revealed a frenzied race among international actors to find a solution that ensures peace and restores security. In this context, various initiatives have emerged aiming to end the war amidst a turbulent domestic environment and overlapping external interests. Despite these efforts, success remains contingent on Sudan’s ability to impose its national conditions and leverage on-ground changes to achieve a just and sustainable peace.
Accordingly, several indicators point to peace efforts, including a relative decline in military operations to enable political and diplomatic activity. Additionally, recent measures to open safe corridors for delivering humanitarian aid to certain areas might reflect temporary understandings among parties to create a positive atmosphere. Alternatively, it may indicate the beginning of implementing aspects of the Jeddah Agreement on security and humanitarian arrangements signed on May 11, 2023.
We are also witnessing intensified diplomatic efforts from countries such as Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Mauritania, supporting mediation efforts. This indicates a regional desire to break the political deadlock and steer Sudanese parties toward negotiated solutions. These indicators suggest that, even if unofficial, such understandings could pave the way for broader moves to halt a war that is nearing its second year.
Given this reality, we can anticipate the trajectory of initiatives beginning to take shape. The Turkish initiative, recently proposed by Turkey and delivered to the Sudanese government by the Turkish Deputy Foreign Minister, aims to reduce tensions between Sudan and the UAE to ultimately end the war. According to media leaks, this initiative is built on three main points:
1. Reducing media and political tensions between the two countries, enabling the transition to the next stage, during which the UAE would cease military support to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
2. Sudan withdrawing its complaint against the UAE at the UN Security Council.
3. Direct discussions between the leadership of both countries to address unresolved issues.
While the initiative appears balanced, relying on a gradual implementation of its clauses, it requires precise handling. It is preferable to approach it in a phased manner, beginning with reducing media escalation as a prelude to creating favorable conditions. This should be tied to the UAE’s immediate commitment to halting arms supplies to the militias, followed by enhancing dialogue on unresolved issues. Withdrawing the complaint from the UN Security Council should be a final step, executed after documented commitments from the UAE with the mediators’ assurance.
Additionally, the Egyptian initiative, announced in Cairo by Sudanese Finance Minister Jibril Ibrahim, seeks to leverage Egypt’s strategic relationship with Sudan. This initiative aims to bring Sudanese and Emirati parties to the negotiation table directly. However, the initiative faces challenges, such as the lack of an official announcement from Egypt and limited international support. Nevertheless, Egypt has begun understandings with Chad, hosted a conference for Sudanese political parties, and is organizing broader talks involving all Sudanese parties without exception.
Amid this complexity, the UN-supported Jeddah framework stands out as the most mature international approach. It outlines security and humanitarian arrangements beginning with a ceasefire announcement and the provision of humanitarian aid, followed by security measures. Under these measures, the RSF would vacate all civilian properties and homes, regrouping in camps in preparation for integration into the Sudanese Armed Forces under the law.
Although the Jeddah framework is clear and the Sudanese government has submitted a roadmap for its implementation, it faces challenges due to weak enforcement mechanisms and a lack of trust among the parties. Nonetheless, it remains the most viable pathway due to its acceptance by all parties.
Integrating regional initiatives, particularly Turkish and Egyptian efforts, under the umbrella of the Jeddah framework ensures coordinated efforts and reduces international competition. This increases the chances of tangible progress, potentially leading to a quick end to the war, given the combined diplomatic weight of the involved parties.
Despite these commendable efforts and the Sudanese people’s longing for peace and security, the role of the Sudanese Armed Forces remains pivotal in supporting these initiatives. Their ground advantage is crucial in strengthening the government’s position in any potential negotiations. As is well known, negotiations without military superiority leave the government vulnerable to external and rebel blackmail.
Another key factor in accelerating the success of these initiatives is effective international backing. Sustainable peace cannot be achieved without genuine international and regional support. Unifying the various initiatives under the Jeddah framework provides a cohesive platform ensuring adherence to settlements addressing the war’s repercussions.
Additionally, internal willpower—represented by the Sudanese people and political entities—is vital. Domestic political actors must agree on peaceful solutions. National media should also channel efforts towards options that enhance peace, security, and sovereignty.
From this perspective, the future of peace in Sudan depends on the country’s ability to leverage on-ground developments to achieve peace and restore security while maintaining balanced regional and international relations. Sudan needs to build productive relationships that support a comprehensive national project inclusive of all Sudanese without succumbing to external impositions or ambitions.
Best regards.
Monday, January 6, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com