Sudan’s conflict sees the SAF making territorial gains in Khartoum, while the RSF attempts to form a parallel government. This ongoing war, marked by significant casualties and displacements, raises critical questions about Sudan’s future. Analysts express concerns about regional stability and the legitimacy of both military factions amid growing humanitarian crises.
Sudan’s ongoing conflict sees the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) advancing in Khartoum while the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) aim to form a parallel government. The war, escalating since April 2023, has resulted in over 12 million people displaced and thousands dead, prompting urgent discussions on Sudan’s future and the potential for peace amid growing humanitarian crises.
The RSF recently signed a “political charter” in Kenya, indicating its intent to establish a separate governing body. This has raised alarms as the RSF, losing credibility internationally due to prior violence, appears to seek legitimacy and recognition reminiscent of Libya’s divided governance.
Analyst Jihad Mashamoun warns that RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti) could disrupt regional stability, potentially inciting unrest among Arab tribes in Chad. He also pointed out that travel routes for illegal immigration into Europe might become leverage for securing international recognition of RSF authority.
The SAF has recently achieved crucial victories, including the capture of El-Obeid and advancements in Khartoum. Alan Boswell, from the International Crisis Group, asserts that total control over Khartoum would serve as a major strategic win, but could shift violence to other regions like Darfur and Kordofan.
As the SAF consolidates its control, analysts speculate on the possible negotiations between the RSF and Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. Yet, the risk remains that outside influences could provoke an escalation of the conflict, as both sides vie for power.
While some experts hope for a resolution, concerns persist that the RSF may reinforce its numbers with additional fighters from neighboring regions. A potential designation of the RSF as a terrorist organization could diminish its support, yet such actions have been stymied by hesitance from international actors, including the U.S.
The future of negotiations and mediation remains uncertain, especially while the SAF has military momentum. The dynamics of power could pivot based on international involvement, particularly with regional powers like Egypt, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia playing significant roles in determining Sudan’s stabilization.
Ultimately, regardless of who claims military victory, the new governance will face challenges from Sudan’s populace demanding democracy and accountability, highlighting the complex landscape awaiting resolution post-conflict.
The Sudanese conflict highlights the dual developments of military gains by the SAF and the RSF’s attempts for political legitimacy. With the humanitarian crisis worsening, the situation remains precarious. The SAF’s advances could lead to a new phase of conflict in other regions. The potential for negotiations is complicated by international dynamics and the pressing need for reconstruction and democratic governance in Sudan post-war.
Original Source: www.aa.com.tr
