The ongoing civil war in Sudan has escalated humanitarian crises, with foreign powers playing a significant role in fueling the conflict. Allegations of war crimes have surfaced against both the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, amid accusations of starvation tactics against civilians. The involvement of foreign nations, particularly the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, complicates peace efforts as diplomatic focus remains skewed towards other regional conflicts. Immediate and substantial measures are necessary from the international community to address this dire situation.
The ongoing civil war in Sudan, which erupted last April, has highlighted the troubling and often opaque involvement of foreign nations in the conflict. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has publicly accused the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) of bombarding its ambassador’s residence in Khartoum, a claim that the SAF has refuted, attributing the attack to the rival paramilitary group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which they allege is supported by the UAE. Both factions are reportedly engaged in war crimes, an unfortunate reality facilitated by the backing they receive from various foreign governments. The relentless supply of arms to these factions has compounded an already dire humanitarian crisis, with the recent assessments from United Nations experts indicating that starvation tactics are being utilized against approximately 25 million civilians. Such actions have displaced around 10 million individuals while diseases, including cholera, proliferate within the world’s largest hunger crisis. Despite the seasonal autumn harvest providing a temporary respite from food shortages, the long-term outlook is dire as both factions deliberately target local volunteers committed to relieving hunger. Many of these volunteers emerged from the ranks of the resistance committees that had initially spearheaded the recent pro-democracy protests. The situation in Sudan is particularly tragic, given the country’s recent history of overthrowing a dictator and striving toward a civilian-led government—only to have its future jeopardized by the self-serving interests of international players. Although the UAE has denied supporting the RSF under the leadership of Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (commonly known as Hemedti), credible allegations of arms supply persist. Notably, the UAE’s interests revolve around the strategically significant Red Sea ports as well as access to valuable resources like gold and land. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are backing the SAF, under the command of Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. This conflict has been described as a “Middle East war being played out in Africa.” Yet, diplomatic efforts appear to be concentrated on resolving escalating tensions within the Middle East itself. A recent meeting between UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and President Biden included only a brief mention of Sudan in their lengthy joint statement. Historically, the United States has not aligned its vocal support for democratic reforms in Sudan with actionable strategic planning or substantial assistance. The emphasis during the Trump administration was primarily on persuading Sudan’s transitional government to normalize relations with Israel. The latest attempts to facilitate informal negotiations aimed at reconciling the rival generals encountered setbacks. General Burhan’s recent counteroffensive to regain control of Khartoum suggests a miscalculation regarding his position. Resolution of the conflict appears elusive unless key external stakeholders, particularly the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, can reach a consensus. The lack of urgency from the U.S. further complicates matters, calling for enhanced action from the UK government, which leads the discussions at the UN Security Council. Moreover, the UAE’s concern for its global reputation indicates that cultural boycotts and pushback from international artists and athletes may significantly influence its actions.
The conflict in Sudan has its origins in a power struggle following the ousting of long-time dictatorship, which led the population to seek a transition towards a democratic governance structure. The civil war, which has resulted in vast humanitarian crises and the egregious targeting of civilians, has laid bare how external powers are exploiting this situation for their interests. The intricate web of support among neighboring countries, such as the UAE and Egypt, further complicates the dynamics of the region, making the situation increasingly precarious for the Sudanese populace. The plight of the civilians amidst a backdrop of war crimes being committed by armed factions—each backed by foreign powers—highlights the severity of the crisis at hand and the need for international accountability and steps towards peace.
In conclusion, the civil war in Sudan is a tragic reminder of how foreign involvement can exacerbate domestic conflicts. The allegations of war crimes against both factions underscore the horrific consequences faced by civilians caught in the crossfire. A resolution remains elusive without coordinated efforts from influential states, notably the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, to facilitate peace talks and address the humanitarian disaster. To avoid further suffering in Sudan, it is imperative for the international community to not only recognize its role in the crisis but also to take decisive action to support the citizens yearning for stability and peace.
Original Source: www.theguardian.com
