Lack of Regional Coordination Harms the Sudanese Issue

Dr. Al-Shafi’ Khader Saeed

In an article of ours, three months ago, we discussed some indicators that we see as a reason for prolonging the war and obstructing peace efforts in Sudan. These indicators include: The absence of will on the part of both sides of the conflict, and each side’s delusion that it will eliminate the other side with a knockout blow. The history of wars in the world says that any military confrontations, if they do not stop in the first days or weeks, will continue for a long time, and the longer the period, the less the chances of a permanent ceasefire. The longer the conflict lasts, the more the number of armed groups outside the control of their central leadership increases, and they begin to behave partially like bandits; some are trying to resolve old disputes over resources in a specific area, and these, in addition to fighters from outside Sudan, mostly want the war to continue because it is the source from which they make money.
The deepening of the tribal nature of the war, the rise of racist and hate speech, and the spread of killing based on identity and political affiliation, which is difficult to curb and prolongs the war or renews it if it stops unless the causes are addressed. The political and diplomatic competition between external powers, which has led to multiple international initiatives, all of which are completely incapable of imposing a cessation of fighting. The faltering unity of civil forces and the rise of the voice of the foreign agenda among them, and the preference of some international players for certain civil groups and their support, which fuels divisions among civil forces and hinders their search for the right path that helps stop the fighting.
Last Wednesday, a consultative meeting on Sudan concluded in Cairo, with the participation of the League of Arab States, the United Nations UN ,the African Union AU , the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the European Union EU , the Kingdom of Bahrain (Presidency of the Arab League Summit), the Islamic Republic of Mauritania (Presidency of the African Union), and the Republic of Djibouti (Presidency of IGAD), in addition to the owners of the peace initiatives, the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the United States of America.
The meeting concluded with the participants evaluating their good offices and the peace initiatives they sponsor. It also addressed the coordination mechanisms between these efforts and regional and international initiatives on Sudan, as well as areas of integration between these initiatives, the added value of the role of countries, and the establishment of practical coordination tools that enhance coordination and integration… However, the very next day, the African Union AU sent invitations to the Sudanese civil forces for a preparatory meeting to be held in Addis Ababa between the 10th and 15th of next July, noting that the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced its invitation to a similar meeting in the same month. Isn’t this the lack of coordination and competition that we referred to above?! I believe that if the regional and international powers are really serious about addressing the Sudanese crisis and contributing to stopping the war, they must take the initiative to establish a unified international coordination platform for efforts to stop the war and establish peace in Sudan, with a clear and logical distribution of tasks among the concerned international and regional parties.
In this regard, the UN Personal Envoy can play the role of the main coordinator in this platform between the efforts of the African Union, the IGAD, the Jeddah Forum, the League of Arab States, the Neighboring Countries Initiative, and the European Union. Certainly, enabling this unified platform to play its role as required, and for any plan it devises to succeed, it needs support from the broadest Sudanese popular base, and it also needs to determine the correct priorities that concern the people. However, I do not think that the priority now is to try to gather Sudanese civilians in this or that capital to unite them and discuss the war issue politically, despite its importance and necessity, as politics is not the only approach, and perhaps not the correct approach, or the priority, in the current state of Sudan.
Any attempts to address the war issue in isolation from the tragic suffering that the Sudanese people are experiencing will be a tweet out of tune. The correct approach, and the top priority now, to address the catastrophic situation in Sudan is not the political process, but rather implementing the humanitarian agenda, addressing the suffering, and using the international legal framework (the responsibility to protect) to ensure the protection of civilians and the delivery of humanitarian aid to them, and to prevent any potential tendencies to commit genocide as happened in Geneina and is feared to happen in El Fasher.
Thus, the logical framework, as we see it, for addressing the war crisis in Sudan is: Prioritizing the humanitarian agenda and ensuring the protection of civilians, while emphasizing that the humanitarian agenda and the protection of civilians file are not subject to politicization or negotiation, and humanitarian aid should not be held hostage by the warring parties. Imposing and maintaining a technical ceasefire, in accordance with the mechanisms in force regionally and internationally and within the framework of international law. Exerting all possible efforts to mend the social fabric and reduce social, ethnic and political polarization. Followed by, and as a final stage: engaging in a comprehensive political process of a foundational nature for the Sudanese state, designed, managed and led by Sudanese civilian forces, leading to a foundational transitional period in which there is no room for the two warring parties or foreign parties, and dominated by the main slogan of the revolution: the military to the barracks and the RSF dissolved.
Finally, we repeat what we have said in more than one previous article that the horrific violations in Sudan will not be deterred by condemnations and statements of denunciation, but rather require the international community to assume its responsibilities in protecting the Sudanese civilian population, starting with using the powers stipulated in the United Nations Charter to impose a ceasefire and deliver humanitarian aid to the population, especially the displaced and refugees, banning the entry of weapons into Sudan, issuing international sanctions on countries that support the continuation of the war in Sudan and enable the continuation of these crimes and violations in flagrant violation of international legitimacy resolutions, expanding the scope of work and mandate of the International Commission of Inquiry of the United Nations Human Rights Council and obligating the warring parties to accept it and allow it unconditional access to all areas of Sudan to investigate the violations that have been committed.