Sudan’s unfolding humanitarian crisis
Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Some conflicts, like those in Ukraine and Gaza, command global attention. Others, like the one in Sudan, go practically unnoticed. Yet the stakes in Sudan, both in terms of human suffering and geopolitical impact, are catastrophically high.
Close to a quarter of Sudan’s people have fled their homes, 3mn of them into fragile neighbouring states. Another 25mn Sudanese face acute hunger. With farming disrupted and the economy in ruins, the prospect of 1980s-style famine looms.
Media access is almost non-existent, so the world has been shielded from the sight of children starving to death in refugee camps, such as Zamzam in northern Darfur. Meanwhile, warring factions play god with people’s lives, blocking food and medical aid from areas not under their control, although thanks to diplomacy that situation may have improved marginally in recent months.
It should go without saying that no human life is worth more than any other, whether Sudan is a cause célèbre or not. More must be done to negotiate access for humanitarian aid. Inadequate efforts to raise international funds should be stepped up. The UK recently said it was doubling its contribution for the year to £113mn. It is a small, if welcome, start.
The war is often portrayed as a struggle between two generals, with fighters from the Sudanese Armed Forces, the de facto government, on one side and those of the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces on the other. If only it were that simple.
The UAE, Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others have infiltrated the conflict, jockeying for gold, influence and territorial control, particularly over Port Sudan on the Red Sea coast. This is a new kind of middle-power war fought by proxy in which Sudanese civilians, only a few years ago so hopeful after the fall of dictator Omar al-Bashir, are the victims.
Inside Sudan, power has splintered. The RSF is under the control of Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, a former camel trader known as Hemeti, but his modus operandi is to unleash terror as he did in Darfur 20 years ago.
The Sudanese Armed Forces, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, is a looser coalition. Islamists have edged close to Burhan, seeing the war as a potential path back to the power they enjoyed under Bashir’s 30-year rule.
The threat of Islamists running Sudan is one reason the UAE is backing Hemeti, but he has even less legitimacy than Burhan. No military solution is possible. Sudan’s only long-term hope for stability is a resumption of the aborted civilian transition begun in 2019.
Meanwhile, Sudan’s war threatens to bleed into the broader crisis in the Sahel. That could complete a 6,000-kilometre “coup belt” beneath the Sahara where both jihadism and Russian influence are increasingly entrenched. Europe should be more active in trying to prevent that frightening outcome.
For all these reasons, Sudan’s crisis should be urgently pushed up the political agenda. The first priority has to be to avert humanitarian disaster. No side, especially one that occupies a seat at the UN as the rump SAF government does, can be allowed to use famine as a weapon of war.
In the longer term, the tenuous threads to peace lead largely through the Middle East. The US has been coy about calling out the UAE’s support for the RSF. It should be less so. Pressure should also be placed on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and others to throttle Sudan’s generals of the arms they need to pursue their ruinous war. This conflict started in Sudan. But the key to its end lies outside.
#Sudans #unfolding #humanitarian #crisis