Appeasing UAE and its Genocidal Militia in Sudan : Perpetuating War and Atrocities

Mohammed Ahmed Adam

The Western appeasement policy towards UAE and its sponsored RSF militia is
perpetuating war- atrocities and human disaster in Sudan.

As happened in the late 1920s and early 1930s, when European powers betrayed Abyssinia, a member of the League of Nations then, to appease the Fascist Italy, they are currently letting the Sudanese people down, in favor of their commercial ties with the UAE, the main power fueling the war in Sudan.

Tragically, they are betraying one of the first national armies on the continent that helped them defeating Fascism in World War II. Celebrating its centennial anniversary next year, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) played decisive roles in liberating Abyssinia, (current Ethiopia) , Eritrea, and Libya.

At a time when the war crimes committed by Israel in Gaza, besides, the intensification of the battle fronts between Russia and Ukraine, dominated the international media landscape, members of RSF militia in Sudan, were perpetrating – amidst international and regional silence and rather complicity- horrific crimes against the defenseless civilian Sudanese population, no less appalling, in scale and substance, than the crimes, the Palestinian people are subjected to in Gaza.

Embolding the agressor
Indeed, the example of the unlimited western support for Israel, is almost identical to that of UAE’s to rebel militia in Sudan; as both the allies, in a unique unity in means and purpose, act as regional sponsor for the aggressors, in the two respective cases: uninterrupted supply and arsenal of the world most sophisticated and lethal weapons, to indulge in a cycle of an out of ordinary killings, terror and persecution, in order to deepen the state of fear, amongst the targeted indigenous population, ultimately forcing them to flee for their lives. In return, replacing them with other a different ethnicity, transferred purposely from specific countries, under the direct supervision of international and regional intelligence services, as will be detailed later.

The striking resemblance in such complicity, is not limited to providing weapons, but rather extends to providing political and diplomatic cover, besides, harnessing large international media outlets for the very same purpose; available around the clock to barefacedly deny or justify, the aggressor’s – otherwise – documented crimes. The invisible common denominator, remains the same; the boundless craving and scrambling for power and wealth.

Scramble for resources and influence

such conceptualization becomes more credible, when we take into account, to what extent, Sudan is endowed with huge but, untapped natural resources, most notably oil, gold and uranium, just to name a few, whereas, it is absolutely no longer a secret today on the other hand, that Gaza Marine, the natural gas field off the coast of the Gaza Strip, is estimated to contain more than 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

History repeats itself
Sadly, some western governments seemed to have opted to stop short or at best, show modest condemnation vis-a-vis Abu-Dhabi’s blanket military support to the RSF militia, in various forms, ranging from direct funding to logistics military equipment, huge enough however, to cause about, the current mayhem, devastation, and humanitarian disaster in Sudan. In fact, the crocodile tears, is the last thing Sudan needs.

History tends to repeat itself, such western attitude is reminiscent of yet another historical bargain; when Britain and France, in unenviable Machiavellian attitude, opted to turn a blind eye, toward the ambitions of expansion of both Nazism and fascism, in the era of the 1930s of the last century, in what is known today in political science, as the policy of appeasement; purportedly, to curb the rising influence of communist Russia, on the one hand, and to attract Italy to the side of the Allies against Germany, on the other.

Abyssinia (Ethiopia) by then, was destined to be scapegoat in that process; the Franco-Italian Agreement was concluded on January7,1939, essentially to free Italy’s hand in Africa, in exchange for its cooperation in Europe; Pierre Laval, the French Prime Minister at the time, told Mussolini that he wanted a Franco-Italian alliance against Nazi Germany, and in exchange, Italy could have a “free hand” in Abyssinia. Tracing in a way or another, the footsteps of the infamous Belfour Declaration of 1917 “the fateful promise from those who do not own to those who do not deserve.”

Silence conspiracy
A disgusting international and regional conspiracy of silence, or at best for inaction, toward the RSF militia, continues to encourage rather than deter, the militia to further their atrocities against the defenseless civilian population. Again, as we speak now, typically, as the situation in Rafah (Gaza), where a growing number of countries and international organizations are now scrambling to convince Israel to halt its planned ground offensive, panic is similarly soaring of an imminent assault in the Sudanese city of El- Fashir, hundreds of miles away from Rafah, where yet a new potential massacre is in the making. Of course, “history will not be kind” if those calls are ignored.

The RSF has been mobilizing thousands of fighters, to launch full-scale offensive against the El Fashir city, where around 800.000 IDPs, including survivors of previous RSF attacks; those who narrowly escaped the inferno of genocide and ethnic- cleansing in El Geneina and elsewhere in Darfur, have sought refuge and safety. Unfortunately, hypocritical western governments, in the face of yet an imminent massacre, chose only to watch, barely saying “My goodness, not again!”

Succumbing to UAE Cheque diplomacy
On the other hand, in New York, another scene of the same episode unfolds; apparently, succumbing to UAE’s pressure, citing a flimsily shameful justification (missing English translation of the complaint), (the great) Britain, asked the UN Security Council to postpone its deliberations of Sudan’s accusations against the UAE’S aggression, by supporting the RSF militia, fighting the Sudanese army.

They say, the book is known by its title; the above session was originally scheduled to be a special meeting to which non-member states could be invited. However, the format of the Security Council meeting was miraculously, changed to a closed consultation, and the participation of non-member states, Sudan – in the fore of which – was no longer permitted. The goal was clear: blocking Sudan from asking the Security Council, to consequentially, refer the aggressor state, to the International Criminal Court, noting here that, Sudan had already presented to the Council, a comprehensive dossier, of the aggressor state’s involvement.

It wasn’t long, before the secret behind British conspiratorial position (as a pen-holder) is revealed; according to the report of “Bloomberg”, UAE had threatened to cancel a number of pre-scheduled trade meetings with British officials in protest against Britain joining the United States in pressuring the UAE to stop its alleged support for RSF, which has been at war with the Sudanese army for more than a year, and is preparing to move towards the city of El-Fasher, in the western Darfur region of the country, home to more than 2 million people, to commit yet a new massacre.

Sudan has lodged a formal complaint against the United Arab Emirates (UAE), accusing the latter of acts of aggression, rendering it the complicit, in all associated crimes and atrocities of the RSF militia, thereby incurring international responsibility as per established principles of international law.

In fact, despite the UAE’s barefaced denial of support for the RSF forces, international reports like Middle East Eye for instance, kept on indicating the ongoing UAE’s military assistance conducted through Chad, authenticated by findings from United Nations experts and multiple press outlets. As a matter of fact, members of the U.S. Congress have openly called upon the UAE to cease support for the paramilitary forces in Sudan.



On his part, Sudan’s envoy to the UN, Ambassador Idris criticized the intervention of Britain, the penholder for Sudan (the country currently responsible for drafting resolutions on Sudan), calling it “arbitrary and lacking neutrality.” suggesting that the UAE was rattled by the complaint and pressured Western Security Council members to postpone the meeting, emphasizing at the same time that the delay “won’t prevent the UAE from being condemned,” and the discussion will move to Mozambique’s presidency in May.

In the US, a group of Democratic and Republican senators have introduced a bill that classifies “acts of RSF and allied militias in Darfur against non-Arab ethnic communities as genocide”. In the same vein, United Nations independent observers, in a report submitted Friday to the Security Council in January, accused the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and their allied Arab militias of carrying out horrific ethnic violence in El Geneina, Western Darfur, that killed some 15 people and could amount to “war crimes and crimes against humanity”. The report also considered the UAE’s accusations of military support to these forces to be “credible.”

The above international testimonies, vindicate again and again, that a huge gap between words and action, continues to characterize some of these western governments. It’s enough to refer the respected reader, to their respective attitudes and positions towards the appalling events in Gaza. which in fact, has put them in a fierce and unprecedented confrontation with their own peoples looking forward to seeing justice and peace prevail in Palestine and elsewhere.

To that effect, and commenting on the recent statement made by Matthew Miller, the official spokesman for the US State Department, the Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has rejected what it described as “ the false equivalence” made by the U.S administration on the 24th of April 2024, blurring the facts on the ground, as it purposely fails to distinguish between the Sudan armed forces, the national and professional army, which – by the way- celebrates, its centenary in 2025, and a “terrorist militia” of the RSF, on the other hand, comprised of multitude of foreign mercenaries.

It’s surprising, these startling evidence of UAE’s involvement, were allowed to fly beneath Washington’s radar, despite the reports published by the New York Times, that some human rights defenders, had criticized the Biden administration, for not exerting sufficient political pressure on the UAE, to stop providing weapons and ammunition to the RSF militia.

By the very same token, according to Foreign Policy, a group of American legislators, have already addressed the UAE’s Foreign Minister, in December 2023, demanding an immediate cessation of such support, which would otherwise, deepen the conflict on tribal and ethnic lines and increase the risk of Sudan’s collapse and disintegration.

Not far behind, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee wrote to President Joe and called on him “urgently” to determine whether punitive measures should be taken under the Magnitsky Act, against RSF militia, after accusations of its involvement in “grave violations” of human rights, in the context of war in Sudan.



the degree of the above astonishment necessarily decreases however, when we recall from amongst, the recent but famous scandals that shook public opinion in America, the famous arrest of Thomas Barrack, the private equity investor, who was arrested with two other men on charges related to illegally lobbying his close friend former President Donald Trump for the United Arab Emirates while Trump was running for and serving as president. In other words, the defendants were accused of secretly advancing the interests of the UAE at the direction of senior officials of that country by influencing the foreign policy positions of Trump’s 2016 campaign, and then those positions of the U.S. government during Trump’s presidency through April 2018.

Political Islam: a pretext?
The perplexing question remains, what brings all these circles together to antagonize the Sudan, is it really, the so called political Islam in Sudan? However, even if that’s true – just for the sake of argument- again, does a political dispute or even animosity towards a specific political group in Sudan, justifies such a blind collective punishment, against the whole population; against children, women and the elderly, does it worth, the destruction of infrastructure, the Sudanese people have built with their hands and toil for long decades? Burning and destruction of factories, farms, universities, museums and public libraries.

Ironically enough, it’s the same pressing question, posed today by the world’s conscience nowadays, about Israel’s policy of collective punishment against the unarmed Palestinian people in Gaza. Otherwise, it is only a cover up for something bigger behind.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button