Why Sudan's RSF chose this parallel government ahead of peace talks
Tasis is based on a partnership between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a powerful armed group that controls swaths of South Kordofan and Blue Nile states in southern Sudan.
SPLM-N has been fighting a rebellion against the central government and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for 40 years – a conflict rooted in aggressive land grabs by central elites.
The RSF and SAF are former allies, yet a power struggle triggered an all-out civil war in April 2023.
Analysts have told Al Jazeera that Tasis aims to challenge SAF for legitimacy and power after more than two years of conflict.
'The Tasis government is the RSF's latest desperate attempt to rebrand itself as a state authority rather than a militia,' said Anette Hoffmann, an expert on Sudan at the Clingendale Institute think-tank in the Netherlands.
'Yet all their actions have continued to prove the opposite. While announcing their government … RSF forces and their allies were besieging entire state capitals and starving innocent civilians,' she told Al Jazeera.
Tasis announced its government just three days before a new round of Sudan peace talks is set to begin on July 29 in the United States.
The talks will bring together representatives from the Sudan Quartet – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the US. Neither SAF nor the RSF will be included in this round, according to Africa Intelligence.
Regardless, the RSF has long been wary of being dismissed as a mere 'armed group' in ceasefire negotiations and left out of the circles of power and influence in a post-war Sudan due to a lack of international legitimacy.
By forming its own government, the Tasis Alliance aims to garner recognition from some friendly states and boost its bargaining position in future negotiations, said Kholood Khair, an expert on Sudan and the founder of the Confluence Advisory think-tank.
'What's interesting is that there has been so little disclosed about these new talks, yet it has started a fury across Sudan and catalysed the formation of these two governments,' Khair told Al Jazeera.
She added that the army adopted a similar ploy in May when it appointed Kamel Idris as prime minister in Port Sudan, a strategic city on the Red Sea Coast.
Idris recently appointed five new ministers to round out his new government, just a day after Tasis announced its parallel administration.
Like Port Sudan, the RSF-backed government is run by a council of military elites and civilian loyalists.
The RSF's leader, Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo, heads the Tasis's 15-member Presidential Council. SPLM-N leader Abdelaziz al-Hilu serves as his deputy.
A reported 47 percent of posts in the new administration went to RSF-aligned armed commanders and civil servants, while SPLM-N was given about one-third of the posts.
The rest were handed out to smaller armed groups and political parties who advantageously joined Tasis to boost their relevance, as previously reported by Al Jazeera.
Post appointees include Suleiman Sandal from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) – a rebel group that emerged out of the Darfur wars and splintered in the current war – who was made interior minister.
Al-Tahir Hajar, from the Sudan Liberation Forces Gathering (SLFG), which also emerged from the Darfur wars, is a prominent member of the Tasis leadership council.
The prime minister of the Tasis government is Mohamed Hassan al-Ta'aishi, a politician from Darfur and a former member of the transitional Sovereign Council that led Sudan shortly after former President Omar al-Bashir was toppled in 2019.
The Sovereign Council was headed by SAF chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Hemedti. The two were supposed to step down from power in 2021, yet they orchestrated a coup to dismiss the then-civilian cabinet and dash hopes for democracy.
Since SAF recaptured the capital Khartoum from the RSF in March, the former has been in control of the east and centre of the country, while the RSF has attempted to consolidate its control over the western and southern regions.
The Tasis government may have ended up cementing that division more than helping it gain an advantage at the negotiating table, said Alan Boswell, an expert on Sudan with International Crisis Group.
'The RSF aims to be legitimate as a national actor,' he said. 'Yet [this government] makes de facto partition all the more likely, even if that is not the strategic intent.'
Khair added that the creation of a second government further incentivises armed groups to accumulate power in hopes of scoring a post in one of the two administrations.
'This [new government] really catalyses the proliferation of different armed groups,' she said. 'More armed groups will mobilise … to win a position [in one of the two governments] during wartime.'
'This is a reality that really entrenches war dynamics.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Why Sudan's RSF chose this parallel government ahead of peace talks
The Tasis Alliance, a coalition of Sudanese armed groups formed in February, has unveiled a parallel 'transitional peace' government to rival Sudan's wartime government in Port Sudan. Tasis is based on a partnership between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a powerful armed group that controls swaths of South Kordofan and Blue Nile states in southern Sudan. SPLM-N has been fighting a rebellion against the central government and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for 40 years – a conflict rooted in aggressive land grabs by central elites. The RSF and SAF are former allies, yet a power struggle triggered an all-out civil war in April 2023. Analysts have told Al Jazeera that Tasis aims to challenge SAF for legitimacy and power after more than two years of conflict. 'The Tasis government is the RSF's latest desperate attempt to rebrand itself as a state authority rather than a militia,' said Anette Hoffmann, an expert on Sudan at the Clingendale Institute think-tank in the Netherlands. 'Yet all their actions have continued to prove the opposite. While announcing their government … RSF forces and their allies were besieging entire state capitals and starving innocent civilians,' she told Al Jazeera. Tasis announced its government just three days before a new round of Sudan peace talks is set to begin on July 29 in the United States. The talks will bring together representatives from the Sudan Quartet – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the US. Neither SAF nor the RSF will be included in this round, according to Africa Intelligence. Regardless, the RSF has long been wary of being dismissed as a mere 'armed group' in ceasefire negotiations and left out of the circles of power and influence in a post-war Sudan due to a lack of international legitimacy. By forming its own government, the Tasis Alliance aims to garner recognition from some friendly states and boost its bargaining position in future negotiations, said Kholood Khair, an expert on Sudan and the founder of the Confluence Advisory think-tank. 'What's interesting is that there has been so little disclosed about these new talks, yet it has started a fury across Sudan and catalysed the formation of these two governments,' Khair told Al Jazeera. She added that the army adopted a similar ploy in May when it appointed Kamel Idris as prime minister in Port Sudan, a strategic city on the Red Sea Coast. Idris recently appointed five new ministers to round out his new government, just a day after Tasis announced its parallel administration. Like Port Sudan, the RSF-backed government is run by a council of military elites and civilian loyalists. The RSF's leader, Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo, heads the Tasis's 15-member Presidential Council. SPLM-N leader Abdelaziz al-Hilu serves as his deputy. A reported 47 percent of posts in the new administration went to RSF-aligned armed commanders and civil servants, while SPLM-N was given about one-third of the posts. The rest were handed out to smaller armed groups and political parties who advantageously joined Tasis to boost their relevance, as previously reported by Al Jazeera. Post appointees include Suleiman Sandal from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) – a rebel group that emerged out of the Darfur wars and splintered in the current war – who was made interior minister. Al-Tahir Hajar, from the Sudan Liberation Forces Gathering (SLFG), which also emerged from the Darfur wars, is a prominent member of the Tasis leadership council. The prime minister of the Tasis government is Mohamed Hassan al-Ta'aishi, a politician from Darfur and a former member of the transitional Sovereign Council that led Sudan shortly after former President Omar al-Bashir was toppled in 2019. The Sovereign Council was headed by SAF chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Hemedti. The two were supposed to step down from power in 2021, yet they orchestrated a coup to dismiss the then-civilian cabinet and dash hopes for democracy. Since SAF recaptured the capital Khartoum from the RSF in March, the former has been in control of the east and centre of the country, while the RSF has attempted to consolidate its control over the western and southern regions. The Tasis government may have ended up cementing that division more than helping it gain an advantage at the negotiating table, said Alan Boswell, an expert on Sudan with International Crisis Group. 'The RSF aims to be legitimate as a national actor,' he said. 'Yet [this government] makes de facto partition all the more likely, even if that is not the strategic intent.' Khair added that the creation of a second government further incentivises armed groups to accumulate power in hopes of scoring a post in one of the two administrations. 'This [new government] really catalyses the proliferation of different armed groups,' she said. 'More armed groups will mobilise … to win a position [in one of the two governments] during wartime.' 'This is a reality that really entrenches war dynamics.'
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Al Jazeera
The Nile cannot be governed by colonial-era treaties
In a couple of weeks, the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), the biggest hydroelectric dam on the African continent, will be inaugurated. The construction of this dam has taken more than a decade and has cost nearly $5bn. The government and people of Ethiopia mobilised the funds for this national project from their meagre internal resources. No international financing was made available for this project. While the construction of the dam has received some international media attention, the media coverage has not made clear the Ethiopian perspective. This is a modest attempt to rectify that problem. The GERD is constructed on the Blue Nile, which Ethiopians call Abay. Abay means 'big' or 'major' in several Ethiopian languages. Abay is one of the main tributaries of the Nile River. Although many associate the Nile almost exclusively with Egypt, the river traverses 10 other African countries. Among these countries, Ethiopia holds a unique position because 86 percent of the Nile water that reaches Egypt originates from the Ethiopian highlands. Abay is the biggest river in Ethiopia with a huge potential to boost overall socioeconomic transformation and development. It has been a long-held aspiration of Ethiopians to utilise this resource. The GERD is a national development project that fulfils this dream. Despite its huge labour force and economic potential, Ethiopia has yet to make headway in its endeavour to industrialise. One critical factor that has held back this effort has been Ethiopia's lack of energy. According to the latest figures, barely 55 percent of Ethiopians have access to electricity. There is a huge demand and need for electricity in Ethiopia. Hence, the GERD is seen as our national ticket out of darkness and poverty. Necessity dictates that Ethiopia use this major resource as an instrument to spur growth and prosperity for the benefit of its 130-million-strong population, which is expected to reach 200 million by 2050. The GERD is expected to generate about 5,150 megawatts of electricity and produce an annual energy output of 15,760 gigawatt hours. This will double Ethiopia's energy output, which will not only light our homes but also power industries and cities and transform our economy. The GERD would also make it possible to increase our energy exports to neighbouring countries, thereby strengthening regional integration and interconnectedness. The lower riparian states of the Nile would also derive immense benefit from the GERD because it would prevent flooding, sedimentation and water loss through evaporation. The very purpose of the GERD, which is generating electricity, requires that the water flows to lower riparian countries after hitting the enormous turbines that generate the electricity. The dam does not block or stop the river from flowing. Doing so would make electricity generation impossible and defeat the very purpose for which the dam was built. So, you might ask, why are some lower riparian countries complaining about the construction of the dam? The reason for their objections emanates not from rational fear or legitimate concern. The objections are the result of an attitude shaped by a colonial-era water-sharing agreement concluded between Britain and Egypt in 1929 and its derivative agreement sealed in 1959 between Egypt and Sudan. Ethiopia was not a party to any of these treaties. However, some Egyptians contend that the water-sharing formula enshrined in the colonial-era agreement, which excludes the remaining nine African nations from having any share of the Nile, is still valid and should be adhered to by all Nile riparian countries. From an Ethiopian point of view, this anachronistic argument, often presented as 'historic rights over the Nile' is unacceptable. While Britain is entitled to enter into any agreements regarding the River Thames, it does not have the right to dispose of the waters of the Nile or the Abay River. As we all recall, the late Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser rejected Britain's claims over the Suez Canal. For much stronger reasons, Ethiopian leaders have consistently rejected arguments based on colonial arrangements in which Ethiopia did not have a say. The Ethiopian view is that the Nile is a shared natural resource. It should be used in a cooperative framework that would be beneficial for all riparian countries. The developmental aspirations and dreams of all nations are equally legitimate. The needs of some should not be prioritised over the needs of others. A fair, just and inclusive arrangement that takes into account the realities of the 21st century is needed. Such an arrangement is already in place in the form of the Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement, which is a contemporary, African-initiated treaty designed to promote sustainable management and equitable use of the Nile. This treaty has already been signed and ratified by Ethiopia, Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and South Sudan. Egypt should stop yearning for a bygone colonial era and join these Nile riparian countries in their joint effort to promote fair and equitable use of the Nile in a sustainable manner. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
4 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Two friends, one war and the RSF's reign of terror in Khartoum
In Shambat al-Aradi, a tight-knit neighbourhood in Khartoum North once known for its vibrant community gatherings and spirited music festivals, two childhood friends have suffered through confinement and injustice at the hands of one of Sudan's warring sides. Khalid al-Sadiq, a 43-year-old family doctor, and one of his best friends, a 40-year-old musician who once lit up the stage of the nearby Khedr Bashir Theatre, were inseparable before the war. But when the civil war broke out in April 2023 and fighting tore through their city, both men, born and raised near that beloved theatre, were swept into a campaign of arbitrary arrests conducted by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The friends were detained separately and tortured in different ways, but their experiences nonetheless mirrored one another – until they emerged, physically altered, emotionally broken and forever bound by survival. Al-Sadiq's ordeal began in August 2023 when RSF forces raided Shambat and arbitrarily arrested him and countless other men. He was crowded into a bathroom in a house that the RSF had looted along with seven other people and was kept there for days. 'We were only let out to eat, then forced back in,' he explained. During his first days of interrogation, al-Sadiq was tortured repeatedly by the RSF to pressure him for a ransom. They crushed his fingers, one at a time, using pliers. At one point, to scare him, they fired at the ground near him, sending shrapnel flying into his abdomen and causing heavy bleeding. After three days, the men were lined up by their captors. 'They tried to negotiate with us, demanding 3 million Sudanese pounds [about $1,000] per person,' al-Sadiq recalled. Three men were released after handing over everything they had, including a rickshaw and all their cash. Al-Sadiq and the other remaining prisoners were moved to a smaller cell – an even more cramped toilet tucked beneath a staircase. 'There was no ventilation. There were insects everywhere,' he said. They had to alternate sleeping – two could just about lie down while two stood. A few kilometres away, al-Sadiq's friend, the musician, who asked to remain anonymous, had also been arrested and held at the Paratrooper Military Camp in Khartoum North, which the RSF captured in the first months of the war with Sudan's military. That would not be the only time the musician was taken because the RSF had been told that his family were distantly related to former President Omar al-Bashir. 'They said I'm a 'remnant of the regime' because of that relation to him even though I was never part of the regime. I was against it,' he said, adding that he had protested against al-Bashir. Months into the war, his family's Shambat home was raided by the RSF and his younger brother was shot in the leg. To keep everybody safe, the musician quickly evacuated his family to Umm al-Qura in Gezira state, then went home to collect their belongings. That was when he was arrested. During his time at the military camp, he told Al Jazeera, the RSF fighters would tie him and other prisoners up and lay them facedown on the ground in the yard. Then they would beat them with a 'sout al-anag' whip, a Sudanese leather whip traditionally made of hippo skin. The flogging lasted a long time, he added, and it was not an isolated incident. It happened to him several times. In interrogations, RSF personnel fixated on his alleged affiliation with al-Bashir, branding him with slurs like 'Koz', meaning a political Islamist remnant of al-Bashir's regime, and subjecting him to verbal and physical abuse. He was held for about a month, then released to return to a home that had been looted. He would be detained at least five more times. 'Most of the detentions were based on people informing on each other, sometimes for personal benefit, sometimes under torture,' al-Sadiq said. 'RSF commanders even brag about having a list of Bashir regime or SAF [Sudan armed forces] supporters for every area.' While he was held by the RSF, the musician told Al Jazeera, he and others were forced to perform manual labour that the fighters did not want to do. 'They used to take us out in the morning to dig graves,' he said. 'I dug over 30 graves myself.' The graves were around the detention camp and seemed to be for the prisoners who died from torture, illness or starvation. While he could not estimate how many people were buried in those pits, he described the site where he was forced to dig, saying it already had many pits that had been used before. Meanwhile, al-Sadiq was blindfolded, bound and bundled into a van and taken to an RSF detention facility in the al-Riyadh neighbourhood. The compound had five zones: a mosque repurposed into a prison, a section for women, an area holding army soldiers captured in battle, another for those who surrendered and an underground chamber called 'Guantanamo' – the site of systematic torture. Al-Sadiq tried to help the people he was imprisoned with, treating them with whatever they could scavenge and appealing to the RSF to take the dangerously sick prisoners to a hospital. But the RSF usually ignored the pleas, and al-Sadiq still remembers one patient, Saber, whom the fighters kept shackled even as his health faded fast. 'I kept asking that he be transferred to a hospital,' al-Sadiq said. 'He died.' Some prisoners did receive treatment, though, and the RSF kept a group of imprisoned doctors in a separate room furnished with beds and medical equipment. There, they were told to treat injured RSF fighters or prisoners the RSF wanted to keep alive, either to keep torturing them for information or because they thought they could get big ransoms for them. Al-Sadiq chose not to go with the other doctors and decided to cooperate less with the RSF, keeping to himself and staying with the other prisoners. Conditions were inhumane in the cell he chose to remain in. 'The total water we received daily – for drinking, ablution, everything – was six small cups,' al-Sadiq said, adding that food was scarce and 'insects, rats and lice lived with us. I lost 35kg [77lb].' Their captors did give him some medical supplies, however, when they needed him to treat someone, and they were a lifeline for everyone around him. The prisoners were so desperate that he sometimes shared IV glucose drips he got from the RSF so detainees could drink them for some hydration. The only other sources of food were the small 'payments' of sugar, milk or dates that the RSF would give to prisoners who they forced to do manual labour like loading or unloading trucks. Al-Sadiq did not speak of having been forced to dig graves for fellow prisoners or of having heard of other prisoners doing that. For the musician, however, graves became a constant reality, even during the periods when he was able to go back home to Shambat. He helped bury about 20 neighbours who died either from crossfire or starvation and had to be buried anywhere but in the cemeteries. The RSF blocked access to the cemeteries without explaining why to the people who wanted to lay their loved ones to rest. In fact at first, the RSF prohibited all burials, then relented and allowed some burials as long as they were not in the cemeteries. So the musician and others would dig graves for people in Shambat Stadium's Rabta Field and near the Khedr Bashir Theatre. He said many people who were afraid to leave their homes at all ended up burying their loved ones in their yards or in any nearby plots they could furtively access. The friends' ordeals lasted into the winter when al-Sadiq found himself released and the RSF stopped coming around to arrest the musician. Neither man knows why. Both al-Sadiq and the musician told Al Jazeera they remain haunted by what they endured. The torment, they said, didn't end with their release; it followed them, embedding itself in their thoughts, a shadow they fear will darken the rest of their lives. On March 26, the SAF announced it had recaptured Khartoum. Now, the two men have returned to their neighbourhood, where they feel a greater sense of safety. Having been detained and tortured by the RSF, they believe they're unlikely to be viewed by the SAF as collaborators – offering them, at least, a fragile sense of safety.
