The Face of Truth: Security Diplomacy: From Baku to Renewed Confidence
Ibrahim Shglawi
Security Diplomacy: From Baku to Renewed Confidence
The Baku Security Forum was an opportunity in which Sudan demonstrated its orientation toward redefining its security institutions within a global context full of challenges. The participation of General Ahmed Ibrahim Mufaddal marked a strategic shift in the role of the Intelligence Service during the political and security transition our country is experiencing.
Far from the traditional discourse that reduces intelligence work to information gathering or covert operations, Sudan’s presence in Baku revealed a clear adoption of what can be described as “security diplomacy,” where the intelligence service has become part of foreign policy, with direct presence in international forums—not only to address the international community but to influence it and reshape Sudan’s external image.
General Mufaddal’s speech carried a dual message: first, to affirm that Sudan is facing an externally-backed armed militia threatening its state structure; and second, to present the country as a capable actor contributing to major regional issues such as terrorism, human trafficking, and Red Sea security. This shift in discourse is not accidental but stems from recent internal restructuring within the institution, enabling it to develop its tools and enhance its operational and functional capabilities simultaneously.
The reactivated Operations Authority transformed during the war into a professional field arm that provided effective security and logistical support without any recorded violations that could undermine its performance. In doing so, the service has surpassed the stereotypical image of intelligence, emerging as a national institution that combines competence with discipline and contributes to state maintenance and protection.
President Al-Burhan’s decision yesterday to renew confidence in General Mufaddal came as a culmination of this performance and a reaffirmation of the Intelligence Service’s role as a national tool at a time when files are complex and options limited. Through this decision, the state sent clear messages internally and externally: that competence is the criterion of trust and that Sudan is moving through institutions that know how to balance duty, decisiveness, and coordination.
More importantly, the Intelligence Service now occupies a position that enables it to contribute to “strategic engineering,” not just implementation. Sudan’s geopolitical position, stretching from the Red Sea to the Horn of Africa, enhances the importance of the service as a partner in regional and international security files. Major countries, including the United States, have already taken steps to reopen security coordination channels with Khartoum—an indication of the growing trust and recognition of the service as an effective institution.
However, this new role demands great caution. The service’s effectiveness in the future depends on its ability to transition from circumstantial success to sustainable institutional performance. This requires integrating traditional intelligence work with modern technologies and developing its analytical capabilities to interpret surrounding geopolitical shifts. Moreover, the service’s neutrality, commitment to the law, and avoidance of political and tribal alignments will remain among its most vital strengths in this critical phase.
The emergence of the Sudanese Intelligence Service in the international arena in this form reflects a transformation in its structure and roles. It also signals a pivotal moment in which the Sudanese state redefines itself as a sovereign nation crafting its narrative through disciplined and conscious presence—presenting Sudan as a proactive actor, not a crisis-ridden state. If this approach continues, Baku could mark a turning point in a path through which Sudan regains its status via productive, intelligent partnerships—not through surrender or dependency.
As we see in #TheFaceOfTruth, the Sudanese Intelligence Service today is repositioning itself as a central actor in shaping the future of the state—moving beyond its traditional role toward contributing to political and diplomatic decision-making, as reflected in its notable participation in the Baku Forum and other external movements. Amid a complex war threatening state legitimacy, the service emerged as a disciplined and effective institution that maintained professionalism and provided qualitative support to the regular forces without any violations undermining the state project.
This transformation not only reflects institutional health and regained balance, but also paves the way for security to emerge as a significant national tool for building international partnerships—instead of merely serving internal control and protection. If Sudan invests in this path wisely, “security diplomacy” could be its gateway back to the regional stage as a responsible state—one that balances the demands of sovereignty with the requirements of regional and international partnership.
Wishing you all the best and good health.
Wednesday, September 24, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com