Face of Truth: Sudan: The Equations of Security and Influence
Ibrahim Shglawi
Amid the transitional phase Sudan is undergoing, and as the pace of war has begun to subside, signs have emerged that the process of reshaping the Sudanese state is now being managed with greater strategic balance. For the first time in years, Sudanese operational command centers appear to hold tighter control over the country’s future. In this context, unconventional movements led by intelligence agencies from neighboring countries have surfaced—an attempt to redefine the notions of security and power in Sudan, moving beyond the simplified narratives that reduced the April 15, 2023 war to a mere conflict between two generals.
These security-oriented moves began with a low-profile but meaningful visit by Central African Republic (CAR) intelligence chief Henri Wanzet to Port Sudan. He delivered a verbal message from President Faustin-Archange Touadéra to General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, focusing on enhancing bilateral relations and exploring new avenues of cooperation. The visit reflected an unusual level of attention to Sudan’s internal security dynamics—particularly given the porous, conflict-laden borders and the heavy legacy of displacement and refugee flows.
Just days later, an Ethiopian delegation led by intelligence chief Redwan Hussein landed in Port Sudan, carrying a direct message from Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to General al-Burhan. This visit seemed to mark Ethiopia’s official return to direct engagement with the Sudanese file, after months of strained relations—especially since Addis Ababa had previously proposed an African peacekeeping intervention early in the war, provoking discontent in Khartoum.
The Ethiopian delegation also included Getachew Reda, the former Tigray commander and current advisor to the Ethiopian Prime Minister, signaling that the visit aimed to recalibrate the security relationship between the two nations and explore new positioning opportunities for Ethiopia within the Sudanese arena. The meetings held—and the subsequent leaked understandings—indicated an agenda extending beyond bilateral coordination, tackling strategic issues such as Horn of Africa security, border control, refugee flows, and the handling of non-state actors operating within Sudan.
What stood out during this phase was the gradual escalation in the political and security weight of visiting delegations. While the Central African Republic and Ethiopia differ in terms of regional influence, the shared direction is clear: Sudan has become an intelligence-led file, dominated by security agencies, where the core agenda revolves around stabilizing power dynamics.
In parallel with these developments, the name of Salah Gosh reemerged—an intelligence figure well-known across African capitals for his behind-the-scenes deal-making. The renewed mention of Gosh, albeit quietly, coincided with a redrawing of security balances, suggesting that Sudan is heading toward a transitional model centered on “security first” as a way to organize the next phase.
Ironically, even the mere proposal of Gosh’s return is interpreted in some regional and international circles as a sign of a maturing “post-war moment”—a shift from conflict to managing its outcomes. With Dr. Kamal Idris now appointed as Prime Minister, and the military institution focused on battlefronts, there is a growing need for a figure capable of rebuilding influence networks without relying on cumbersome transitional institutions.
This all comes amid an active effort by the African Union to reintegrate Sudan into its system—potentially through a flexible gateway that tolerates a security-backed transitional government. The Union’s welcoming of Kamal Idris’s appointment was widely understood as a signal of the continent’s willingness to overlook the military character of the current governance arrangement, in exchange for stability that could facilitate Sudan’s return to African institutions, expedite the closure of the war file, and bolster regional security across the Horn of Africa.
The convergence of intelligence actors in Port Sudan—despite differing degrees of influence—sends a unified message, as seen from the “Face of Truth”: the Sudanese state is being reshaped anew, in accordance with the will of its people and the regional balance of interests. It is a message worth watching, tracking, and engaging with when the moment is right.
Perhaps the time has come for Sudanese stakeholders—politicians, military figures, and civilians alike—to realize that rebuilding the state cannot rely on recycled slogans of the past. Instead, it requires a careful reading of the surrounding landscape and a reclamation of initiative—one that unifies the social fabric, reinforces security, and revives the national project grounded in sovereignty and a forward-looking role among nations.
Wishing you well and in good health
Wednesday, June 4, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com