'The internationalisation of the conflict is such that Sudanese actors are not necessarily in full control.'
Eighteen months of war have forced more than 10 million Sudanese from their homes, created the world's largest hunger crisis, and triggered terrible war crimes.
"This is a war that is fought not just in a physical battleground," leading African conflict analyst Solomon Dersso tells What's Unsaid host Obi Anyadike. "This has also become a war that is being fought on the lives and bodies of Sudanese as well, with the warring parties engaging in indiscriminate attacks."
After President Omar al-Bashir was ousted in a coup d'état in 2019, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the rival paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo, were forced to accept a power-sharing agreement with a coalition of civilian and rebel groups. Dersso states that "rewarding these actors" was "the original sin" of this conflict, because "those who perpetrated the violence on unarmed civilians, actually became the rulers".
The founding director of Amani Africa - an independent policy research centre that specialises on the African Union, and peace and security issues across the continent - Dersso also acknowledges that this is a conflict in which global and regional powers are dabbling, arming both sides, intent on pursuing their own geopolitical interests. The external powers include the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt.
"The internationalisation of the conflict is such that Sudanese actors are not necessarily in full control," Dersso says. At least eight initiatives have been launched to bring peace to Sudan - by neighbours, regional organisations, and the UN - but all have failed to get off the ground.
"Focusing exclusively on the warring parties may not, by itself, be enough," he explains. "You need to have a process that also targets the UAEs of this world. That is really at the heart of the matter."
As the war deepens, so does the humanitarian toll. "The level of destruction on civilian infrastructure," Dersso says, "is of unprecedented scale."
He also pays tribute to the Sudanese people at the heart of the suffering. "When everything else and everybody else fails to live up to his, or her, or its obligations and responsibility, it is Sudanese civilians who actually show up," he says. "They are the ones who give us the reason for continuing to fight for peace, for justice."
What's Unsaid is a bi-weekly podcast exploring the open secrets and uncomfortable conversations that surround the world's conflicts and disasters, hosted by The New Humanitarian's Ali Latifi and Obi Anyadike.
Guests: Solomon Dersso, Founding Director, Amani Africa
Subscribe on Spotify, Apple, Google, Stitcher, or YouTube, or search "The New Humanitarian" in your favourite podcast app.
Have a question or feedback? Maybe you have ideas for What's Unsaid topics - from your own conversations or ones you've overheard? Email [email protected] or have your say on Twitter using the hashtag #WhatsUnsaid
Transcript | What will stop the fighting in Sudan? Obi Anyadike:
Today on What's Unsaid: What will stop the fighting in Sudan?
Eighteen months of war have forced more than 10 million Sudanese from their homes, created the world's largest hunger crisis, and triggered terrible war crimes.
Solomon Dersso: This is a war that is fought not just in a physical battleground. This has also become a war that is being fought on the lives and bodies of Sudanese as well, with the warring parties engaging in indiscriminate attacks.
And still there is no end in sight to the fighting between the Sudanese armed forces - or SAF - headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the rival paramilitary Rapid Support Forces - or RSF - led by Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo. It's a conflict in which regional powers are also dabbling, arming both sides, intent on pursuing their own geopolitical interests.
A number of peace initiatives have been tried -- by neighbours, regional organisations, and the UN -- but all have failed to get off the ground. As the war deepens, so does the humanitarian toll. Without a settlement, the risk is that Sudan will fracture into permanent fiefdoms, ruled by violent armed men.
This is, What's Unsaid. A podcast by The New Humanitarian where we explore open secrets and uncomfortable conversations around the world's conflicts and disasters. My name is Obi Anyadike, staff editor at The New Humanitarian.
Today on What's Unsaid we ask: What will stop the fighting in Sudan?
With us is Solomon Dersso. He's the founding director of Amani Africa, an independent pan-African policy research centre that specialises on the African Union and peace and security issues across the continent.
Solomon, thanks for joining us.
Dersso
Good to be with you, Obinna.
Anyadike
Let's get into it. You spent nearly two decades working on peace and security in Africa. What does this conflict mean to you?
Dersso
So, the... what is deeply problematic and saddening about this conflict. You may recall from 2019, the kind of discipline that Sudanese civilians have displayed in putting a very solid, civil disobedience, protest, for achieving more inclusive, a more representative, a more democratic Sudan, despite the repressive violence unleashed on them. They didn't opt for picking up arms, and the international community told them: Okay, we hear you, but the reality of the matter is that real power lies with these actors, and therefore we have to accommodate these actors. So, the original sin - if you like - was when a peace agreement was signed, rewarding basically these actors, because real power lies with them in 2019. And subsequently, the establishment of this power-sharing government, in which those who perpetrated the coup, those who also perpetrated the violence on unarmed civilians, actually became the rulers, right?
Anyadike
According to my rough count, starting with the US and Saudi-backed Jeddah process in May 2023, eight initiatives have been launched to bring peace to Sudan. At the last try in Geneva in August, when the hope was for a ceasefire and a humanitarian access agreement, Burhan, the head of the Army, didn't show up. Can you explain what the key sticking points are to a resolution?
Dersso
Well, a number of sticking points. In the end, I think it has to do with the fact that both sides receive a lot of support from their respective backers, both in terms of ammunition, but also diplomatic and other material and resource support, which actually sustains the perpetuation of the war. And there are also regional, international, political and diplomatic dynamics that also feed into this.
Anyadike
And I'm looking forward to unpacking all of that, but just a little bit more on these peace processes. We've had the Jeddah process, the Cairo process, a Bahrain initiative. I'm sure I'm missing others, but the point is that in a multiplicity of approaches and fora, at the very least, there needs to be coordination, and that role has fallen to the African Union. But is the AU living up to its responsibility?
Dersso
The AU has the ambition. Indeed, as early as May, if not April, the AU established what is called the Expanded Mechanism for Coordination, which is meant to play that role of bringing all the key stakeholders that have influence and role, with respect to the Peace process, under one umbrella. But the ambition is one thing, the reality of actually establishing itself and convincing others that it is indeed able to steer coordination, we haven't really seen that effectively being played by the African Union. There are a number of factors there. You know, November 2023, the Chief of Staff of the African Union Commission, was assigned this responsibility of leading on the Sudan File while working on many other files, including being the Chief of Staff of the African Union Commission. While it is obvious that Sudan deserves and needs to have, not only a hand that is widely recognized as being capable of the challenge, but also without any baggage. And this is someone with baggage in the Sudan process, having been the special envoy following the 2019 coup d'etat in Sudan. So, it is really one where we indeed have a major gap, in terms of coordination and coherence.
Anyadike
Is it fair to say that the AU is not always seen as above the fray? So, there have been suggestions that the AU commission chair Faki Mahamat has not been an honest broker - seen as too close to Chad. The AU Peace and Security Council is currently headed by Egypt - who the RSF doesn't trust. So, this is a perception problem that you're suggesting, is that right?
Dersso
So, I mean, perception obviously plays a role, but the most important thing, perhaps more than perception is, there are expectations in terms of the things that need to happen, alright? It's really about delivering materially on that ambition of being the platform that brings all the actors under one house, one umbrella, and then importantly ensuring that there is coherence. And for that, I think it is extremely important that all the different actors consider the African Union as the one that can be able to facilitate. These are the kinds of things that are getting in the way of the AU playing the role that it actually sets for itself.
Anyadike
Right. Are you hopeful that the potential appointment of Kenya's veteran, former prime minister, Raila Odinga as a new AU Commission Chair could generate some of that much needed diplomatic momentum, some of that heft you've been talking about? Or is it beyond personalities?
Dersso
It depends a great deal. I mean, leadership matters a lot without a doubt, all right. It's not just about personalities at this point in time. The kind of effort, energy, strategy, that you put towards achieving the goal of bringing about - at least in the first place - silencing of the guns and then creating the opportunity for a more effective peace process. If any of the candidates running for the position of chairperson of African Union Commission are able to bring that kind of change, then there is a possibility, indeed. But we have to recognize that the AU has lost a lot of ground and regaining that lost ground wouldn't be an easy thing. Of course, I have to be mindful - and we all have to be mindful - of the fact that not many other actors are either doing any better than the African Union when it comes to the Sudan file.
Anyadike
Right. After Trump's election victory, everybody is now thinking about how the dynamic might change. The US has historically, really not been particularly concerned with the continent. There was a special envoy appointed by Biden to Sudan. He didn't seem to make much headway. Do you see Trump changing anything at all? Or is it more of the same?
Dersso
It's difficult to see things changing substantially, because if you recall 20 years back, with respect to Darfur, for example, high-level attention, policy-wise, all the way up to the presidency. In the current dynamic, there hasn't been that level of attention over the years. So, what you have is basically a US that is no more interested, even when it takes a lead, for example, through the Jeddah process. It doesn't have a sustained policy focus and attention. But most importantly, it hasn't been able to use whatever leverage and influence it could in order to move forward. And I really do not see how there is going to be any better attention and engagement on the Sudan file, during the incoming administration of President Trump than has been the case so far.
Anyadike
Right, which leaves us with the regional players who have picked sides in this war: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Libya, are all involved, but the United Arab Emirates has been especially singled out for its role in supporting the RSF - allegations of channelling weapons through Chad. Is the criticism of the UAE fair? Should we be zeroing in on the UAE, or really, do they have an outsized influence in this conflict?
Dersso
I think one of the questions that arises with respect to the UAE is whether or not the RSF would have managed to carry out the kind of atrocities that it has perpetrated, without the critical support that RSF reportedly received from the UAE. There is indeed a responsibility that needs to be attributed to the UAE, but at the end of the day, it's important to say that it's not just RSF that is receiving support. The SAF also receives support from various sources. So, indeed, in policymaking circles, the question of how to put off or switch off the supply of weapons and arms and other forms of support to these two warring parties, that being a major enabler that actually fuels the fire of war in Sudan. Because one of the questions that this situation raises is whether or not one can say that Sudanese protagonists - the warring parties or other Sudanese actors - are actually in firm control of the pathway to peace in Sudan. It's not clear, and there are some - and I agree with that - who actually feel that maybe this has become too internationalised a war, that focusing exclusively on the warring parties and Sudanese actors may not actually lead us to the kind of peace that we may be seeking.
Anyadike
So, everybody has an interest in this conflict. Are you suggesting that any peace settlement has to be a kind of a grand bargain, where people who have interest in the Horn, people who have interest in the Red Sea, they all need to have their interests met as part of a solution? The Sudan crisis is just a piece of the puzzle?.
Dersso
No, not necessarily. The nature of the internationalisation of the conflict is such that Sudanese actors are not necessarily in full control, and therefore one of the things that this implies it's not necessarily about the interest that many actors may have on the Red Sea and so on and so forth. Right? That is, and should be, separate from what is happening in Sudan, but the nature of the involvement of some of these actors - like the UAE that you mentioned - it's such that focusing exclusively on the warring parties may not, by itself, be enough, and therefore you need to have a process that also targets the UAEs of this world - that is really at the heart of the matter.
Anyadike
Could the UN have done more? For example, the arms embargo on Darfur. Why is it not better enforced to prevent weapons reaching the RSF from Chad and Central African Republic, or made country-wide to interdict arms flowing to SAF?
Dersso
Sanctions for their effectiveness assume that there is actually a buy-in from all those concerned to enforce it. So, part of the problem is exactly that. As it stands, it is not adequately enforced. There is no consensus for expanding this arms embargo, so the diplomatic and regional international environment is such that it's not really playing a facilitating role.
Anyadike
It's one of those things where people throw up their hands and say: Why doesn't the UN get involved? But, we bump up against the reality of that logjam, of the deep ideological rivalries on the UN Security Council, which are now, really are, a fact of life.
Dersso
Yes, that is indeed one of the factors. But at the same time, if, for example, the answer to the question of: Why don't you do more? Is to say that: We are looking up to the African Union to provide leadership. I think that sounds more like an abdication of responsibility, right? Because you can't push this file onto the African Union. You know, have you as, for example, the Secretary General of the UN, tried to make Sudan any major peace and security issue? You are the Secretary General of the UN, have you travelled in the region to mobilise attention around the plight of the Sudanese people? It's not as if your only role is to just do things when it is easy and convenient, but also, even when things are difficult. We haven't seen, really, the kind of attention as has been given to other areas of conflict in the world.
Anyadike
And the scale of the humanitarian crisis is so horrendous, a man-made famine...
Dersso
Outrageous.
Anyadike
And the largest displacement in...
Dersso
...displacement crisis in the world. The level of destruction on civilian infrastructure, on, for example, hospitals and clinics and so on, is of unprecedented scale, and requires a similar level of attention to the kind of attention that has been given - deservedly - to wars in Gaza and Ukraine.
Anyadike
Yeah, but it doesn't seem to be the kind of a moral equivalence there at all. But do you see a kind of a role for, potentially, for a regional humanitarian coordinator to better negotiate access, if we just focus on the humanitarian crisis?
Dersso
That is one issue that needs to receive the most attention at this point in time. You know, when diplomacy breaks down, when peacemaking fades, at the minimum, international actors such as the African Union and the UN, need to direct their energy and effort towards doing one thing: to mitigate human suffering. And you are absolutely right, therefore, that it is of paramount importance that you actually prioritise that as an area of investment, to facilitate effective humanitarian access through the establishment of humanitarian corridors that may actually be monitored jointly through Sudanese, and a hybrid format of Sudanese and non-Sudanese, including, the UN and African Union, and IGAD, for example, and League of Arab States. That is the kind of thing that Sudan, actually, at this point needs. The humanitarian crisis, the level of desperation, and emergence of famine in Darfur, with the potential of expansion to other areas; indeed, there is a need for a collective mobilisation, channelling of all the energy and resources in order to achieve that.
Anyadike
Meanwhile, both sides are pursuing a military victory, seemingly blind to these consequences. How can that calculation be changed?
Dersso
That is a very...That is, I think, at the heart of the conundrum in Sudan at this point in time; changing the calculation of the warring parties. One, I think, if regional and international actors do not treat these warring parties as the only actors in town, and therefore the ones that they have to beg, the ones that they have to cajole, pursue and persuade. I think it will be difficult, without the establishment and effective activation of a civilian front in Sudan, that would really then minimise the outside influence and role that these warring parties are having. You know, an effective civilian front established by Sudanese who actually really put aside their differences, and focus on a more inclusive, democratic Sudan. That is one important possibility and pathway for changing the incentive of the warring parties.
Anyadike
But there has been that recent oil pipeline agreement between SAF and RSF that's allowed for the protection of oil and rebuilding of the pipeline from South Sudan to Port Sudan. It's the only agreement that's held. What does that tell us?
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Dersso
Well, what that tells you is also what this war is about as well, right? This war is about the continuation of the control that these armed entities would like to have over the economic interests - resources - of Sudan. Indeed, apart from the oil pipeline, the other dimension of the war in Sudan has to do with the extraction of mineral resources, particularly gold, and its utilisation for a source of financing the war as well. That is a clear indication of the economic interest that actually drives the war. Is that, however, something that can have a potential avenue for changing the incentive of the warring parties? I'm not really sure about that, because what that actually leads us to, is towards the factors that precipitated the war in the first place. And it's not really through any kind of concession, or through any kind of arrangement in the economic sphere, and with respect to resources, and access to the finances, that you can be able, really, to change the influence of these actors. It may actually put Sudan back to the pre-war status quo.
Anyadike
And that leads us to what a future peace deal could look like. Will it inevitably reward the warlords? Even if in a settlement, they don't have a seat in government, isn't it likely that they'll be there behind the scenes and immune from any accountability for what they've done?
Dersso
So, for purposes of, you know, ceasefire and containing active hostilities, there's no way around. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean that a peace agreement for the resolution of the crisis in Sudan has necessarily to be predicated on giving and rewarding these actors. From a power perspective - because mediation and peacemaking sometimes have to be grounded on the power dynamics on the ground, right? I wonder if that is as a transition, or rather as a permanent, or - nothing is permanent - but as something on which the entire peace edifice would be built on. So, that is really what I have very serious issues with, and I have doubts listening to particularly various civilian Sudanese who have expressed the ambition that Sudan can be able to overcome this crisis and the root causes of the crisis, only if it is able to transcend these actors, and when the role of these actors actually in the political and economic decision-making of the country is removed, that possibility may come.
Anyadike
Just finally, do you see in the resilience, the strength of Sudanese civilians, there is something to celebrate? Is that a positive - if you can call it that - that you take from this conflict, that triumph of human spirit, so to speak?
Dersso
Absolutely, I think this is indeed one of those huge lessons at this point in time, that when everything else and everybody else fails to live up to his, or her, or its obligations and responsibility, it is Sudanese civilians who actually showed up, who actually tried to fill in the vacuum that has been left, and that is also where the hope is. I don't think the Sudanese have lost the hope for achieving what they have aspired and what they have actually expressed and articulated in the course of the past five years, they still maintain that that is still the pathway. So, indeed, that remains to be a major source of hope, and I mean, in the area of work that we are in, you know, you sometimes can be despairing, but when you look, and when you see their courage and their resilience, then that gives you definitely a reason to continue to push for, and contribute whatever it is that you are able to make that contribution. And I wouldn't say that it is unique to the situation in Sudan. I think civilians and those who are caught up in the crossfire, they are the ones who give us the reason for continuing to fight for peace, for justice.
Anyadike
Absolutely. Thank you so much for those insights.
Dersso
Thank you very much. Obi. Bye.
Anyadike
Solomon Dersso is the founding director of Amani Africa, an independent pan-African policy research centre that specialises on the African Union and peace and security issues across the world.
Please visit TheNewHumanitarian.org for ongoing reporting on crisis zones across the world.
And what are people afraid to talk about in today's crises? What needs to be discussed openly? Let us know: send us an email: [email protected]. Subscribe to The New Humanitarian on your podcast app for more episodes of What's Unsaid - our podcast about open secrets and uncomfortable truths. Hosted by Ali Latifi, and me.
This episode is produced and edited by Freddie Boswell, sound engineering by Tevin Sudi, with original music by Whitney Patterson, and hosted by me - Obi Anyadike. Thanks for listening!
