Sudan: Pressure builds on General Burhan for a return to civilian rule

Sudan’s bitter civil war grinds on into its third year. Tens of thousands of people have been killed, critical infrastructure has been destroyed and more than 12 million people have been displaced as a result of the conflict between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

Even before the war started, Sudan was one of the poorest countries in the world and the conflict has made thing even worse: the United Nations has called the world's largest humanitarian crisis.

Sudan’s military regime has insisted on the disbandment of its Rapid Support Force partners but its fortunes appear to have waned since its recapture of Khartoum three months ago, and it now finds itself bogged down in marshy political terrain.

Just last week, a slew of reports suggested that different political pressures are being brought to bear on General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and his Transitional Sovereignty Council, both externally and internally, for a ceasefire, talks, and a return to civilian rule.

The regime appears irked by ex-Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok’s visit to South Africa in late June, at the head of the delegation of the new civilian coalition Somoud (resilience), in order to lobby support for a new peace initiative and the return of civilian rule, an initiative that was well received by South African officials. Hamdok’s government was overthrown by General Burhan in 2021.

Most telling was the statement by Sudan’s foreign ministry warning African nations against engaging with Abdalla’s coalition, stating that it would evaluate its foreign relations based on countries’ support for the national legitimacy of the regime. In other word these seems to be saying,”we won’t talk to you unless you say we’re No 1."

Legitimacy seems to be a sore spot for the regime. While it has qualified recognition from the United Nations, that position is not shared by governments that count; neither the US, which has sanctioned General Burhan over the SAF’s alleged use of chemical weapons, as reported in an article in the New York Times earlier this year nor the EU whose official policy, according to a June 19 report by Africa Intelligence, is one of ‘strict neutrality’ and has concentrated its efforts on funding relief via its Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations.

Somoud also reportedly refuses to recognize the legitimacy of General Burhan’s new appointee as Prime Minister, Kamil Idris. The coalition is said to be planning to bypass Idris and submit its peace proposals directly to the warring parties. This could well influence the shape of future talks and a possible ceasefire, preparations for which began in Brussels last week with a meeting that included the EU, the African Union, the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Bahrein.

The regime also continues to be outflanked on the issue of peace talks, which it has consistently refused to support. This is in contrast with its main armed rival, the Rapid Support Forces (also under U.S sanctions) who just last week reiterated their support for talks.

Ezz El-Din Al-Safi, a senior RSF negotiator, told Arsharq al Awsat: “Dialogue remains the best path to ending a war that has no winners, only losers, both the people and the nation.” Al-Safi said the RSF was ready to discuss the location, timing, and possible mediators for peace talks, but any engagement would have to be met ‘with equal seriousness’ by the military regime.

Moreover, just days earlier, RSF leader Mohamed Dagalo had expressed willingness to resolve tensions with Egypt. This would be another important step towards reconciling with neighbouring countries that have found themselves uncomfortably situated in this conflict.

The SAF’s internal politics could also be seen to be destabilising the regime. Kamil Idris is reportedly struggling to build a cabinet and The Arab Weekly reports that shortly after coming to office he had reportedly stated his intention to build a technocratic government that would have no room for political-party representatives.

Idris, a career diplomat, spent decades at the UN’s World Intellectual Property Organisation and was its director general from 1997 to 2008.

Civilian politicians on both sides of the conflict have reportedly criticised Idris’s approach. Hamdok’s Somoud has seemingly taken this as effectively absolving the SAF of any responsibility for the conflict. But even the SAF’s own civilian political base, represented by the so-called Democratic Bloc, have, it is reported, called Idris out for not consulting them on the composition of his cabinet.

Yet, ironically, Idris has, it is said, committed himself to including positions for the SAF’s allied armed groups despite his earlier position that all militia in Sudan were to be eliminated.

All told, General Burhan’s options are slowly narrowing. His army has failed to subdue its adversaries, his civilian supporters are bickering, his opponents are making the right noises in the right quarters about Sudan’s overwhelming need and desire for peace, and the international community knows this devastating war must somehow be brought to an end. Only this can prevent the disintegration of Sudan, and create the conditions under which the Sudanese people can be saved, and their country reconstructed.

Share this article: