On the Path of Destruction

Sudan has yet gain slipped into a civil war, costing hundreds of lives and forcing tens of thousands of people to flee the country. Fighting the war are two generals – Abdel Fattah Burhan of the Sudan’s Armed Forces and Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo of the Rapid Support Forces. This piece explains the background of this extraordinarily complex conflict and discusses its potential implications for the region and beyond. Bringing both military leaders to a negotiating table must now be the highest priority.

Sudan − a country that has known civil wars

Since achieving its independence from the Anglo-Egyptian government (joint rule by Britain and Egypt) in 1956, Sudan went through intermittent periods of coups. To date, Sudan has had 35 coups, including attempted coups. Of all the coups, the 1989 coup is perhaps the most memorable or consequential for the country. It was executed by President Omar el-Bashir  − a Colonel in the Sudanese army at that time − against President Jaafar Nimeiri, who also came to power in 1969 by the same means.

President Bashir came to power with the backing of Islamic fundamentalists, that is, those who believe in Islam and Sharia Law as the basis of the government and the law. He ruled Sudan with an iron fist for three decades − until he was overthrown in 2019 by the combined forces of civilian protesters and the Sudanese army. The protest started in 2018 after his government announced a rise in fuel and bread prices.

General Burhan and General Dagalo: Two military leaders who have locked horns

Two military forces colluded to remove President Bashir from power purportedly in support of a democratic rule the Sudanese populace demanded through sustained countrywide protests in 2019. The first is the Sudan’s Armed Forces (SAF), which is the country’s national military. The SAF is being led by General Abdel Fattah Burhan  − a career soldier. He joined the army after completing military training in the 1990s. He proved himself to be a capable (and obedient) soldier, leading to his rapid rise in the military rank: he became the Chief of Staff of the Sudanese army in 2018 and the Inspector General of the same army in 2019.

The second is the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti (Little Mohamed). Unlike General Burhan, General Dagalo is not a professional soldier. He comes from a camel herding/trading background − the so-called nomadic people − and has no formal education.

In the early 2000s, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) emerged as a strong rebel force from Western Sudan, predominantly Darfur. The JEM claims to fight against the marginalisation of the western region of Sudan and other injustices committed by the Sudanese government.

The JEM intensified its attacks on the government positions in 2003. In its counter-attacks, the government deployed a group of armed militias known as “Janjaweed”. (The Janjaweed militias − made up of Arab and non-Arab Sudanese − emerged in the 1980s when the Darfur region was experiencing one of its worst crises that led to a collapse of law and order. The militia was formed to provide protection and self-defence for the region).

Hemedti was appointed the commander of the Janjaweed brigade between 2003 and 2005 during which he carried out mass atrocities against the civilian population in Darfur. In 2007, he fell out with the government, citing unpaid salaries for his combatants. He soon inked a peace deal with the government in 2008, allowing him to return to the government. It was reported that around 3000 of his combatants were integrated into the Sudanese army and were promised to be paid regular salaries.

In 2013, President Bashir formed the RSF, made up mostly of the former Janjaweed militias.  The RSF was used to fight the SPLM-N (Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North – a remnant of the SPLM in South Sudan). The Bashir government passed a law in 2017 to regularise the RSF’s status but it was established as an independent security force – basically a presidential protection force. Hemedti was appointed as the RSF’s commander.

Ousting of President Bashir from power in 2019

As mentioned, the Sudanese people staged mass protests in 2018 as a result of the rising living costs in the country, triggered particularly by the rise in fuel and bread prices. On 1 January 2019, several activist groups came together to form the Forces of Freedom and Change (FFC). The FFC led a sustained non-volent resistance against the government. On 6 April 2019, thousands of people marched to the military headquarters in Khartoum and sat-in.

This prompted a coordinated effort by the SAF and the RSF to remove President Bashir from power on 11 April 2019 (it is not clear whether the soldiers were sympathising with the civilians or whether they simply saw an opportunity that ought not to be missed). They then formed a Transitional Military Council (TMC) as an interim government. The citizens, however, wanted a civilian government and continued to protest in droves. With pressure from external actors, a power-sharing agreement was negotiated and signed between the TMC and FFC.

That agreement – the Constitutional Charter for the Transitional Period of 2019 – established the Sovereignty Council as the transitional government of Sudan. The Sovereignty Council was made up of 11 members. 5 were military leaders appointed by the TMC and 5 were civilian leaders appointed by the FFC. The 11th member was a civilian leader appointed jointly by the TMC and FFC leaders (See article 11 of the Constitutional Charter above).

The Sovereignty Council had a tenure of 39 months. The TMC’s leader, General Burhan, chaired the Sovereignty Council for the first 21 months of the transitional period, and  the FFC’s leader, Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, was to chair the Sovereignty Council for the remaining 18 months (article 11 of Constitutional Charter).

The Sovereignty Council was sworn in on 21 August 2019 in Khartoum. However, in October 2021 General Burhan dissolved the Sovereignty Council, saying infighting within the elements of the FFC was derailing the government. He established a transitional military government led by him and General Dagalo as his deputy.

They promised to hold elections in 2023 to hand power over to a civilian leadership. As with any post-conflict transition from military rule to democracy, there are many preconditions for elections. One is integrating the RSF into the Sudanese military. As per the reports, General Burhan and General Dagalo were negotiating the integration of their forces together. However, a question arose as to who the leader of an integrated military should be. With the tenuous working relationship between the two leaders, it became a point of contention, easily creating high tensions that led ultimately to confrontations on 15 April 2023. Essentially, the two leaders are fighting for power.

As of the date of writing this piece, more than 500 people have been killed and more than 4000 people have been displaced. Two ceasefires have been signed. However, they have hardly been respected, with each side accusing the other of ceasefire violations.

Implications from the crisis for the region and beyond

Already, the impact of the war is being felt in the neighbouring countries, particularly South Sudan. More than 10,000 Sudanese have fled to South Sudan and are sheltering in South Sudan’s northern states, namely Upper Nile State and Northern Bahr el Gazal State. (South Sudan is in no position to host refugees).

Beyond the influx, there may be more severe consequences for South Sudan if the war drags on. For example, it could impact the oil export, as oil is mined in South Sudan and exported  through Sudan to the outside world. Both Sudan and South Sudan depend largely on oil export for their economies − almost entirely in the case of South Sudan.

There is also a fear that foreign governments with interests in Sudan may use the civil war to assert their influence by supporting either side to the war. Egypt, for example, is alleged to be involved in the civil war on the side of the Sudanese military forces. Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (moderate Islamic countries) may support the paramilitary forces in an attempt to push back radical Islamism in Sudan as General Burhan is accused of having links with radical Islamists − something he unequivocally denies.

Western nations, particularly the United States of America, may be concerned about Russia’s presence and influence in Sudan. The Wagner group − a private military organisation associated with the Russian government − was deployed to Sudan in 2017 to provide military support to President Bashir and has remained there since. In 2020, Moscow and Khartoum negotiated an agreement to establish a Russian naval base in Port Sudan. The base was supposed to be constructed in 2021 but General Burhan paused the plan reportedly due to pressure from the US government.

Is peace possible?

I was interviewed recently by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and Sky News Australia about the crisis in Sudan. While I am no expert on conflict or the Sudanese political affairs, I stressed what I thought was imperative: restoring peace and stability to the country.

Foreign governments, specifically those closer to the warring parties, should use their rapport to get them to compromise for peace and save lives that are being lost practically daily. War, however long it may be fought or ideologically driven, can never be won. Take South Sudan as example. The people of South Sudan, led by the SPLM, fought the Sudanese government for two decades, costing both sides dearly in blood (and treasure). Despite their resolve, the South Sudanese did not win the war militarily. Rather, the warring parties in the end negotiated a peace agreement − the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) 2005. The CPA was, of course, made possible by several factors, including war weariness and external pressure. The CPA put an end to the war and gave the South Sudanese the right to self-determination by which they decided to have their own independent country in 2011.

It is true, of course, that men hardly learn from history but if the Sudanese leaders were to learn from history, it would be the CPA and the solution it offered for what was feared as an intractable conflict, protracted as it was. Obviously, neither of the two Sudanese military leaders is fighting a revolutionary war like the South Sudanese were. The point, however, is that war is not inevitable.

The way forward

The crisis in Sudan is deeply complex and it may take some time to be resolved. However, based on reports, it was triggered by a power struggle between General Abdel Fattah Burhan of the Sudan’s Armed Forces and General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo of the Rapid Support Forces.

It is incumbent upon these two leaders to recognise the destruction they are causing to their country and compromise for peace and stability. It is equally imperative for foreign governments and international organisations to use their leverages to bring the two leaders to a negotiating table. Only a negotiated peace agreement may bring an end to the war, not guns.