The Quadruple Farce: How Abu Dhabi Tailored the Statement to Its Whim (2 – 2)

As I See

Adel El-Baz

1
At the conclusion of the first part of this article, I stated: “Based on those lies they called ‘principles,’ the quadrilateral presented its toxic prescription to resolve the conflict.” But what exactly is this prescription, wrapped in a statement that carries all the hallmarks of a final, non-negotiable order?

By its logic, the quadrilateral has positioned itself as the ultimate authority over all of Sudan; in other words, it acts as a new mandate reminiscent of the days of the Ottoman Sublime Porte and the High Commissioner—terminology from the colonial era that the quadrilateral now seeks to revive.

Mandates were colonial systems imposed by the League of Nations after World War I, placing countries like Palestine, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon under British or French authority on the pretext that they were “unfit to manage their own affairs.” In practice, it was a cover for direct occupation, allowing a foreign power full control.

The Sublime Porte referred to the Ottoman Sultan’s headquarters in Istanbul and symbolized decrees from the highest Ottoman authority imposed on provinces without discussion.

Ironically, the quadrilateral’s statement today replicates that colonial model: decisions issued from Washington and Abu Dhabi are implemented in Khartoum as if they were orders from a “new Sultan” or a “High Commissioner” acting in Sudan as they please.

2
A note before we begin: every time the statement uses the word “called on,” read it as “ordered.”

So, what exactly did our new quadrilateral masters order?

First, the statement urges—or rather commands:

“Ministers to initiate an initial humanitarian truce for three months to expedite the entry of aid across Sudan.”

Then it decrees:

“This truce should directly lead to a permanent ceasefire.”

And also:

“A comprehensive and transparent transitional process to be completed within nine months.”

All of this must occur:

“Through a comprehensive and transparent process.”

And that process:

“Is not to be controlled by any of the warring parties.”

All of these orders are said to be:

“To meet the aspirations of the Sudanese people for an independent civilian-led government with broad legitimacy and accountability.”

And, of course, signed by the Sultan of the Sublime Porte in Washington and his exclusive agent in Abu Dhabi.

3
Several questions arise as we attempt to implement these orders under “their caps, scarves, and coats”—and we hope the quadrilateral or even their subordinates can answer.

First: where is the aid that we are supposed to deliver during this three-month truce? Yesterday, OCHA confirmed a massive shortfall in humanitarian funding in Sudan—78% of UN operations remain unfunded. The requirement is $4.2 billion for internally displaced people this year, of which only 22.9% is available to meet urgent needs. We have no money to execute your orders. Should we sign a blank check because you think you are gods of the universe?

Second: the aid accompanying the truce you speak of is for besieged cities. Our government has repeatedly requested it, even urging the UN Security Council to adopt resolutions for its delivery—such as the six-month-old resolution on Al-Fashir. Yet militias and their allies ignored the resolution, looting aid meant for civilians. So, if they can defy the Security Council, who will enforce your truce now? Previous truces were violated and exploited by the militias to regroup and rearm.

A new truce proposed now, with no monitoring mechanisms or enforcement, would allow militias to escape the army’s tightening grip in areas like Darfur—a transparent scheme, unlikely to succeed. Even if the government yields to your orders, how will this truce—without funded aid—directly lead to a permanent ceasefire? By “orders” again? If anything, the Sultan should simply issue a direct ceasefire decree. Why wait three months?

4
After declaring a truce leading to a permanent ceasefire, the quadrilateral then orders:

“A comprehensive and transparent transitional process to be completed within nine months.”

What is this process? Who are its participants? What does “comprehensive” mean? Why impose a nine-month deadline? Why not allow dialogue to unfold naturally over a year or two? Are we sheep in their farms or camels in their pens? This directive is absurd.

5
Worse, the process is “not controlled by any warring party.” In other words, a political transition in Sudan excludes the Sudanese army—the current governing authority. So who controls it? The quadrilateral? Their proxies? The UN? Clearly, their statement avoids these questions, as answering them would undermine their supposed emphasis on sovereignty.

A process imposed by external powers, outside government control, essentially strips legitimacy from the official state, leaving hired agents to dictate the “comprehensive and transparent transitional process” according to their foreign masters’ agenda. This reveals Abu Dhabi’s reliance on the Al-Daglo militia, notorious for crimes reaching genocide, now pursued by the U.S. Congress for terrorism.

Instead of learning from the failure of past attempts to hijack Sudan with force, they now try to sell illusions through exiled figures. Do they remember that our ancestors resisted empires with bare chests and makeshift weapons?

6
Sudanese citizens, these orders are supposedly for your benefit! According to the quadrilateral:

“To meet the aspirations of the Sudanese people for an independent civilian-led government with broad legitimacy and accountability.”

But what is this “broadly legitimate civilian leadership”? Who grants this legitimacy? The quadrilateral or the Sudanese people? They strip legitimacy from the current government and army to grant it to an unknown civilian leadership—unelected, with unclear sources of authority. This is a new form of mandate, yet Sudanese, who once fought great empires, will not hand over their country on a silver platter to new colonizers, no matter the disguise.

7
According to their plan, the quadrilateral only lacks raising the flags of the new mandate states at the Republican Palace, appointing the general governor, naming Hamdok as prime minister, Dagalo as army commander, “Al-Bagati” as spiritual guide, declaring a new “Ibrahimi” religion, and imposing the “Hilu Constitution.” They might even plant flags over our martyrs’ graves in Khartoum and Darfur.

But let them remember: Gordon’s head once tumbled from the palace steps. That memory alone might restore some sanity and deter some of their agents.

God is supreme over all affairs.