Sudan in danger of self-destructing as conflict and famine reign
Sudan's war is in strategic stalemate. Each side stakes its hopes on a new offensive, a new delivery of weapons, a new political alliance, but neither can gain a decisive advantage.The losers are the Sudanese people. Every month there are more who are hungry, displaced, despairing.The Sudan armed forces triumphantly announced the recapture of central Khartoum in March.It broadcast pictures of its leader, Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, walking through the ruins of the capital's Republican Palace, which had been controlled by the paramilitaries of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), since the earliest days of the war in April 2023.The army deployed weapons newly acquired from Egypt, Turkey and other Middle Eastern countries including Qatar and Iran. But its offensive quickly stalled.
The RSF, headed by Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as "Hemedti", responded with a devastating drone attack on Port Sudan, which is both the interim capital of the military government and also the main entry point for humanitarian aid.These were long-range sophisticated drones, which the army accuses the United Arab Emirates (UAE) of supplying - a charge the UAE rejects, along with well-documented reports that it has been backing the RSF during the 27-month conflict.A simple guide to Sudan's warFear, loss and hope in Sudan's ruined capital after army victoryBurhan and Hemedti - the two generals at the heart of the conflictThe RSF has also expanded operations to the south of Khartoum.Hemedti struck a deal with Abdel Aziz al-Hilu, the veteran rebel commander of the Sudan People's Liberation Army-North, which controls the Nuba Mountains near the border with South Sudan.Their forces combined may be able to make a push to the border with Ethiopia, hoping to open new supply routes.Meanwhile, the RSF has been besieging the capital of North Darfur, el-Fasher, which is defended by a coalition of Darfurian former rebels, known as the Joint Forces, allied with the army.Most of the fighters are ethnic Zaghawa, who have been in fierce conflict with the Arab groups that form the core of the RSF.
Month after month of blockade, bombardment and ground attacks have created famine among the residents, with the people of the displaced camp of Zamzam worst-hit.The RSF and its allied Arab militias have a terrifying record of massacre, rape and ethnic cleansing. Human rights organisations have accused it of genocide against the Massalit people of West Darfur.Zaghawa communities in el-Fasher fear that if the Joint Forces are defeated, they will suffer savage reprisals at the hands of the RSF.The pressure on el-Fasher is growing. Last week the RSF captured desert garrisons on the border with Libya held by the Joint Forces.The military has accused forces loyal to Libyan strongman Gen Khalifa Haftar, who controls the east of the country and is also a reported beneficiary of Emirati support, of joining in the attack.Sudan's civilians, who six years ago managed the extraordinary feat of overthrowing the country's long-time leader Omar al-Bashir through non-violent protests, are in disarray.Different groupings are aligned with Burhan, with Hemedti, or trying to stake out a neutral position. They are all active on social media, polarised, acrimonious and fragmented.The neighbourhood committees that were the driving force of the civic revolution are clinging to life.
Most have kept their political heads down, focusing instead on essential humanitarian activities. Known as "Emergency Response Rooms", aid workers recognise that they are the most efficient channel for life-saving assistance.But many lost their funding when the administration of US President Donald Trump closed down USAID, and other donors have not stepped into the breach.The army and RSF both see any form of civic activism as a threat. They are cracking down, arresting, torturing and killing national aid workers and human rights activists.There is no credible peace process.The UN's chief diplomat assigned to Sudan, former Algerian Prime Minister Ramtane Lamamra, formulated a peace plan that was premised on the assumption that the army would achieve a military victory.All that would be left to negotiate would be the disarmament of the RSF and the reconstruction of the country. That is totally unrealistic.Burhan has a big diplomatic advantage over Hemedti because the UN has recognised the military side as the government of Sudan, even when it did not control the national capital.Hemedti's attempt to launch a parallel administration for the vast territories controlled by the RSF has gained little credibility.
Foreign ministers at a conference in London in April, hosted by British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, failed to agree a path to peace. The conference chairs had to settle for a statement that covered familiar ground.On this occasion, as before, progress was blocked because Saudi Arabia and the UAE could not agree.Diplomats acknowledge that Sudan's war is an African problem that needs an Arab solution.The road to peace in Khartoum runs through Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and Cairo.For Egypt, the big question is whether Burhan is able to distance himself from Sudan's Islamists.Under Bashir, the Islamist movement was in power for 30 years, and established a formidable and well-funded organisation, that still exists.The Islamists mobilised combat brigades that were key to the army's recent victory in Khartoum.Egypt's President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi supports Burhan and wants him to sideline the Islamists, but knows that he cannot push the Sudanese general too far.This question takes on added salience with Israel's attack on Iran and the Islamists' fear that they are facing an irreversible defeat.The other big question is whether the UAE will step back from supporting Hemedti.After the RSF lost Khartoum, some hoped that Abu Dhabi might seek a compromise - but within weeks the RSF was deploying drones that appear to have come from the UAE.The UAE is also facing strategic challenges, as it is an outlier in the Arab world in its alignment with Israel.No-one wants to see Sudan divided. But the reality of the war points towards a de facto partition between bitterly opposed warring camps.
Meanwhile, the world's largest and deepest humanitarian emergency worsens with no end in sight.More than half of Sudan's 45 million people are displaced. Nearly a million are in famine.Both sides continue to restrict aid agencies' access to the starving. The UN's appeal for $4.2bn (£3bn) for essential aid was only 13.3% funded in late May.Globally and among the Arab world's powerbrokers, Sudan is no-one's priority, an orphan in a region that is ablaze.It is a country where the multilateral organisations - the United Nations and the African Union - could still be relevant.They can remind all of their commitments to human rights and human life, and that it is in no-one's interest to see Sudan's catastrophe continue to unfold.The long-suffering Sudanese people surely deserve that quantum of mercy.Alex de Waal is the executive director of the World Peace Foundation at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in the US.
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
The global south needs more than tinkering at a conference: debt forgiveness is the only fair way
It is 2025, and the architecture of economic power remains grossly tilted against the nations of the global south. Nowhere is this imbalance more acute – and more enduring – than in the debilitating impact of sovereign debt. From the vast countries of Africa to the scattered but strategically vital small island developing states (Sids) of the Caribbean and the Pacific, debt has become a modern form of bondage – the chains that restrict growth, sovereignty and the basic human dignity of nations struggling to define their own path to development. The statistics tell an alarming story. By the start of 2024 developing countries' public debt reached approximately $29tn (£21.2tn), rising from 16% of global debt in 2010 to nearly 30%. This escalation was fuelled by a convergence of a global pandemic and rising costs internationally. Today, average borrowing costs in Africa are almost 10 times higher than for the US. Why? International credit rating agencies will point at risk in Africa but this is perception, and a myth, not reality. Africa has consistently been the least risky continent for returns on the dollar when compared worldwide. But nevertheless, the impact is profoundly immoral as global south countries face prioritising debt servicing over essentials. One-third of these fragile countries have to allocate more to servicing interest – as much as 14% of domestic revenue – than to healthcare, education or climate resilience. For decades, these countries have been trapped in a cycle of borrowing to survive and repaying to remain 'credible' in the eyes of the international financial order. But the terms of this credibility have always been set elsewhere – primarily in western capitals, behind the closed doors of international financial institutions. These institutions, under the guise of technical neutrality, have in fact driven economic ideologies that have crippled the same countries they claim to help. As a young economics student in the 1980s, it was made clear to me that the true path was Thatcherism and Reaganomics, elevated to near-religious orthodoxy, both rooted in neoliberalism. Developing countries were told to liberalise, privatise and deregulate. Structural adjustment programmes (SAPs), driven by IMF and World Bank conditionalities, imposed austerity measures that gutted public services and sacrificed the welfare of millions on the altar of fiscal discipline. Healthcare systems collapsed. Schools were closed. Public sector wages were frozen and trade unions deemed to be evil. And yet, we were told to believe this was 'development'. In truth, this was not development but dependency. During the 1980s and 1990s, in Jamaica, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago, these policies led not to prosperity but to deepening poverty, growing inequality and social unrest. In the Caribbean alone, SAPs contributed to lost decades of growth, political upheaval, and widespread disillusionment with the promise of independence. More than a few governments were ousted as a result of electoral backlash against IMF-imposed hardship. Foreign aid – so often touted as a benevolent solution – has played a double-edged role. Far from empowering states, it has often eroded their autonomy. Much of the aid has come with heavy strings attached: contracts that must go to western contractors; conditions that require the opening of markets before local industries are ready; and monitoring mechanisms that diminish sovereign decision-making. No wonder so many African leaders prefer the Chinese offers of lending. The result has been a facade of support, what the great activists Frantz Fanon or Kwame Ture, might have called a 'pitiful mimicry' of development – where countries are forced to pursue western-centric models of skyscrapers, luxury seafront resorts denying locals access to their beaches, and white elephant vanity projects destroying the environment, while their people continue to lack access to clean water, reliable electricity, or functioning hospitals. Development, at its core, should be about expanding the freedoms and capabilities of people. It should mean children can attend school without hunger. That mothers can give birth in safe conditions. That farmers can bring their goods to market on decent roads. That communities can trade, access clean water, and benefit from the natural resources of their lands without being poisoned by extraction. But the dominant model of development, dictated by external creditors and investors, has misconstrued these priorities. In its place, we see the proliferation of unsustainable debt-financed projects, many of which serve elite interests or foreign investors rather than local communities. Loans from the IMF and World Bank have frequently funded projects that do little to enhance long-term national resilience or productivity. And these loans, compounded by high interest rates and currency volatility, are serviced partially – through austerity and further borrowing – but rarely repaid. This is by design. Debt, in this system, is not a tool for development but a mechanism of control. Across the global south, the story is much the same. Multinational corporations, often operating with generous tax concessions and little oversight, engage in resource extraction that depletes environments and communities. They argue that their share of profits is justified by their investment in infrastructure and innovation. Yet these same companies contribute disproportionately to environmental degradation – through oil spills, deforestation, over-mining and pollution – without being fairly taxed or held accountable. One-sided trade agreements perpetuate this imbalance. The rules of global commerce, whether in mining, agriculture or tourism, are rigged in favour of the north. Risk assessments by international credit rating agencies, often influenced by outdated or racist perceptions, and opaque and biased criteria, further discourage equitable investment in the south. These assessments have more to do with where a country is located than with its actual economic potential or fiscal responsibility. Meanwhile, the brain drain continues. The brightest young minds of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific are drawn to wealthier countries in search of opportunity denied at home, leaving behind hollowed-out institutions and leadership vacuums. Local education systems produce excellence, only for it to be exported. The voices of our nations are also muted on the global stage. Despite holding the majority of the world's population, the global south holds a minority of voting power in institutions such as the UN. Decisions that affect our future are made without our meaningful participation but with token theatre. The UN holds its future of development financing conference in Seville, Spain, next week, it should be a moment for honest discussion on how the world can come together to support sustainable development, but already the US and the UK have blocked action on tackling the unfair burden of debt. When disasters strike – whether hurricanes, earthquakes, or the slow violence of the climate crisis – the burden of recovery falls overwhelmingly on us. The loss and damage fund, formally established at Cop27 in 2022 and only put into operation in 2024, has been long championed by vulnerable nations but still remains underfunded and under-prioritised. Yet for many Sids, the climate emergency is not a future threat – it is a catastrophe now. Shorelines are disappearing. Coral reefs are dying. Agriculture is failing. Lives are being lost. It is long past time for a reckoning. The economic architecture that dominates global development discourse has failed. It has failed the poor. It has failed the planet. And it has failed the very ideals of justice and solidarity upon which the post-second world war international system was supposedly built. We need more than tinkering at the margins. We need more than an extravagant conference in Seville can deliver. We need debt forgiveness – not as a charity, but as a historical rectification. We need concessional financing with reduced interest rates and transparent, fair assessments of investment risk. We need climate reparations through robust, predictable and progressive loss and damage funds. In times of force majeure, we need aid that empowers, not aid that entraps. Most of all, we need the freedom to define development on our own terms – rooted in equity, sustainability and sovereignty. Until these structural injustices are addressed, the global south may remain poor not because of a lack of potential or ambition, but because the rules of the game were never written for our success.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Driven to starvation, Sudanese people eat weeds and plants to survive as war rages
With Sudan in the grips of war and millions struggling to find enough to eat, many are turning to weeds and wild plants to quiet their pangs of hunger. They boil the plants in water with salt because, simply, there is nothing else. Grateful for the lifeline it offered, a 60-year-old retired school teacher penned a love poem about a plant called Khadija Koro. It was "a balm for us that spread through the spaces of fear,' he wrote, and kept him and many others from starving. A.H, who spoke on the condition his full name not be used, because he feared retribution from the warring parties for speaking to the press, is one of 24.6 million people in Sudan facing acute food insecurity —nearly half the population, according to the I ntegrated Food Security Phase Classification. Aid workers say the war spiked market prices, limited aid delivery, and shrunk agricultural lands in a country that was once a breadbasket of the world. Sudan plunged into war in April 2023 when simmering tensions between the Sudanese army and its rival paramilitary the Rapid Support Forces escalated to fighting in the capital Khartoum and spread across the country, killing over 20,000 people, displacing nearly 13 million people, and pushing many to the brink of famine in what aid workers deemed the world's largest hunger crisis. Food insecurity is especially bad in areas in the Kordofan region, the Nuba Mountains, and Darfur, where El Fasher and Zamzam camp are inaccessible to the Norwegian Refugee Council, said Mathilde Vu, an aid worker with the group based in Port Sudan. Some people survive on just one meal a day, which is mainly millet porridge. In North Darfur, some people even sucked on coal to ease their hunger. On Friday, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called the Sudanese military leader Gen. Abdel-Fattah Burhan and asked him for a week-long ceasefire in El Fasher to allow aid delivery. Burhan agreed to that request, according to an army statement, but it's unknown whether the RSF would agree to that truce. A.H. said aid distribution often provided slight relief. His wife in children live in Obeid and also struggle to secure enough food due to high prices in the market. His poem continued: 'You were a world that sends love into the barren time. You were a woman woven from threads of the sun. You were the sandalwood and the jasmine and a revelation of green, glowing and longing." Fighting restricted travel, worsening food insecurity Sudanese agricultural minister Abu Bakr al-Bashari told Al-Hadath news channel in April that there are no indicators of famine in the country, but there is shortage of food supplies in areas controlled by the paramilitary forces, known as RSF. However, Leni Kinzli, World Food Programme Sudan spokesperson, said 17 areas in Gezeira, most of the Darfur region, and Khartoum, including Jebel Aulia are at risk of famine. Each month, over 4 million people receive assistance from the group, including 1.7 million in areas facing famine or at risk, Kinzli said. The state is suffering from two conflicts: one between the Rapid Support Forces and the army, and another with the People's Liberation Movement-North, who are fighting against the army and have ties with the RSF, making it nearly impossible to access food, clean water, or medicine. He can't travel to Obeid in North Kordofan to be with his family, as the Rapid Support Forces blocked roads. Violence and looting have made travel unsafe, forcing residents to stay in their neighborhoods, limiting their access to food, aid workers said. A.H. is supposed to get a retirement pension from the government, but the process is slow, so he doesn't have a steady income. He can only transfer around $35 weekly to his family out of temporary training jobs, which he says is not enough. Hassan, another South Kordofan resident in Kadugli said that the state has turned into a 'large prison for innocent citizens' due to the lack of food, water, shelter, income, and primary health services caused by the RSF siege. International and grassroots organizations in the area where he lives were banned by the local government, according to Hassan, who asked to be identified only by his first name in fear of retribution for speaking publicly while being based in an area often engulfed with fighting. So residents ate the plants out of desperation. 'You would groan to give life an antidote when darkness appeared to us through the window of fear.,' A.H. wrote in his poem. "You were the light, and when our tears filled up our in the eyes, you were the nectar. Food affordability Vu warned that food affordability is another ongoing challenge as prices rise in the markets. A physical cash shortage prompted the Norwegian Refugee Council to replace cash assistance with vouchers. Meanwhile, authorities monopolize some markets and essential foods such as corn, wheat flour, sugar and salt are only sold through security approvals, according to Hassan. Meanwhile, in southwest Sudan, residents of Nyala, the capital of South Darfur, rely on growing crops, but agricultural lands are shrinking due to fighting and lack of farming resources. Hawaa Hussein, a woman who has been displaced in El Serif camp since 2004, told the AP that they benefit from the rainy season but they're lacking essential farming resources such as seeds and tractors to grow beans, peanuts, sesame, wheat, and weika — dried powdered okra. Hussein, a grandmother living with eight family members, said her family receives a food parcel every two months, containing lentils, salt, oil, and biscuits. Sometimes she buys items from the market with the help of community leaders. 'There are many families in the camp, mine alone has five children, and so aid is not enough for everyone … you also can't eat while your neighbor is hungry and in need,' she said. El Serif camp is sheltering nearly 49,000 displaced people, the camp's civic leader Abdalrahman Idris told the AP. Since the war began in 2023, the camp has taken in over 5,000 new arrivals, with a recent surge coming from the greater Khartoum region, which is the Sudanese military said it took full control of in May. 'The food that reaches the camp makes up only 5% of the total need. Some people need jobs and income. People now only eat two meals, and some people can't feed their children,' he said. In North Darfur, south of El Fasher, lies Zamzam camp, one of the worst areas struck by famine and recent escalating violence. An aid worker with the Emergency Response Rooms previously based in the camp who asked not to be identified in fear of retribution for speaking with the press, told the AP that the recent wave of violence killed some and left others homeless. Barely anyone was able to afford food from the market as a pound of sugar costs 20,000 Sudanese pounds ($33) and a soap bar 10,000 Sudanese pounds ($17). The recent attacks in Zamzam worsened the humanitarian situation and he had to flee to a safer area. Some elderly men, pregnant women, and children have died of starvation and the lack of medical treatment, according to an aid worker, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he's fearful of retribution for speaking publicly while living in an area controlled by one of the warring parties. He didn't provide the exact number of those deaths. He said the situation in Zamzam camp is dire—'as if people were on death row.' Yet A.H. finished his poem with hope: 'When people clashed and death filled the city squares' A.H. wrote 'you, Koro, were a symbol of life and a title of loyalty.'
Sky News
6 hours ago
- Sky News
Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda sign US-brokered peace deal - but doubts over success linger
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have signed a peace deal which Donald Trump said he brokered - resulting in the US getting "a lot" of mineral rights in the process. The deal has been touted as an important step towards ending the decades-long conflict in eastern DRC which has caused the deaths of six million people. US secretary of state Marco Rubio called it "an important moment after 30 years of war". Earlier on Friday, President Trump said he was able to broker a deal for "one of the worst wars anyone's ever seen". "I was able to get them together and sell it," Mr Trump said. "And not only that, we're getting for the United States a lot of the mineral rights from Congo." The Rwanda -backed M23 rebel group, the most prominent armed group in the conflict, has suggested that the agreement won't be binding for them. It hasn't been directly involved in the planned peace deal. DRC foreign minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner invoked the millions of victims of the conflict in signing the agreement with Rwandan foreign minister Olivier Nduhungirehe. The agreement, signed by the foreign ministers during a ceremony with Mr Rubio in Washington, pledges to implement a 2024 deal that would see Rwandan troops withdraw from eastern DRC within 90 days, according to a copy seen by Reuters. "Some wounds will heal, but they will never fully disappear," Ms Wagner said. "Those who have suffered the most are watching. They are expecting this agreement to be respected, and we cannot fail them." Mr Nduhungirehe noted the "great deal of uncertainty" because previous agreements were not put in place. "There is no doubt that the road ahead will not be easy," he said. "But with the continued support of the United States and other partners, we believe that a turning point has been reached."
