Democratic Unionist Party leader Khaled Al-Fahl in an interview to ( Sudan Events ):We are working to mobilize all energies to end the phenomenon of militias and preserve state institutions

For these reasons (…) the pace of some countries has accelerated to stop the war

The bet on the Geneva round lacks the credibility of mediation in stopping the war

The American envoy’s request to meet Burhan at the airport is contrary to norms

The militia’s response to the American invitation is worthless

As long as it continues to violate

The Democratic Unionist Party leader Khaled Al-Fahl said that his party is working to mobilize all popular and political energies to expedite the resolution of the battle, end the tragedy of the Sudanese people, end the phenomenon of militias in the country, and preserve state institutions.
Al-Fahl pointed out in an interview to (Sudan Events ) that the United States of America USA is not keen to end the war, as indicated by the lack of positive engagement with the violations that the Rapid Support RSF Militia has been committing. He said that the request of the US Special Envoy to Sudan, Tom Perriello, to meet Burhan at the airport is contrary to norms. The following is the text of his statements.

Sudan Events-Interview – Aya Ibrahim

Developments in the country’s crisis are proceeding rapidly. What are the expected scenarios in your opinion?
The armed forces SAF will continue to confront the militias on various battlefronts, and the doors of negotiation will not be closed. The armed forces SAF are committed to implementing Jeddah Agreement to protect civilians signed on May 11 and 20, 2023. There is a role required from the World community to pressure the militias to implement the agreement, especially the United Nations and the mediation countries, the US and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, to put an end to the crimes and violations of the rebel Rapid Support RSF Militia and stop the war.
And where is the role of the Democratic Unionist Party in what is happening?
The Democratic Unionist Party’s position is clear, which is to preserve the sovereignty of the country, its institutions, and the legitimate state represented by the armed forces.
It is leading the political powers in its supportive and backing position for the armed forces SAF in the war against the militias and mercenaries.
It is working to mobilize all popular and political energies to expedite the resolution of the battle, end the tragedy of the Sudanese people, end the phenomenon of militias in the country, and preserve the state institutions.
Some believe that the political components did not have any role in the country’s crisis. What do you say?
First, the political components must be defined and a separation must be made between the political forces that represent the political backer of the militia and the national political powers that support the armed forces SAF, as the position of the powers supporting the militia is known and clear to everyone and is represented by the Civilian Forces Coordination (Taqddum ).
As for the position supporting the SAF, it is represented by the Sudanese people through its various social and political components. The national forces have continued to work on developing a roadmap that contributes to ending the war and the post-war phase.
It is noted that there have been rapid external movements recently towards Sudan.
In what context do you place them?
Recently, the Word community realized that its role in ending the Sudanese war was not sufficient, as most of the neighboring African and Arab countries had ambiguous and unclear positions, and most of them adopted a neutral position.
However, the continuation of the war in Sudan through the militias and the violations they committed against the Sudanese people sounded the alarm about the expansion of these militias that do not believe in geographical borders. Some neighboring countries felt that prolonging the war in Sudan could lead to the transfer of armed conflict to some neighboring countries, so some countries accelerated their efforts to try to find a formula for an agreement to stop the war.
How do you comment on the new American invitation for talks between the SAF and the militia in Geneva?
The peace talks were settled in Jeddah Agreement to protect civilians on May 11 and 20 of last year, before the war had completed its first month.
The mediation was joint between the United States US and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, but the two mediating countries did not make the slightest effort to implement the agreement and establish mechanisms capable of pressuring the militias and ending the tragedy of the Sudanese people.
Invitations continued to multiply in different forums, the last of which was the call submitted by the US State Department with the participation of Saudi Arabia in Switzerland.
However, the truth is that the Americans are not keen to end the war, as evidenced by the lack of positive engagement with the violations that the Rapid Support RSF Militia has continued to commit. They are still talking about two parties, in a clear indication of the lack of recognition of the legitimacy of the State institutions represented by the armed forces SAF .
Therefore, betting on the August 14 round lacks the credibility of mediation in stopping the war.
The militia leader quickly agreed to the invitation. In what context do you put that?
The militia media rooms have continued to follow this approach to try to portray that they are keen to stop the war, but why is this response not reflected in the practices of their forces by not attacking citizens or practicing violations and inhuman crimes against the Sudanese people?
This response has no value as long as they continue to violate and commit more crimes against the Sudanese people.
On the other hand, the army did not respond to the invitation. What is your comment?
The armed forces SAF have continued to deal positively with all invitations to stop the war since the first days, and the biggest evidence is the army’s keenness and acceptance to sit with the Rapid Support Forces RSF in the name of the armed forces SAF and not the government of Sudan, knowing that the legitimate state institutions are represented by the armed forces SAF. In order to stop the suffering of the Sudanese people, the armed forces did not hesitate to respond to any invitations or to any initiatives from countries in the region or the world.
The Geneva round was scheduled to be preceded by a visit by the US envoy Tom Perriello to Sudan and others to the country, but according to the news, the visit was canceled to request a meeting with the President of the Sovereignty Council TSC , at the airport. How do you view that?
US envoy Tom Perriello is touring neighboring African and Arab countries, but he was not keen to visit Sudan or meet the leadership. This is the biggest evidence of the intentions of the United States of America, which facts have proven are not sincere, because the keenness not to visit Sudan is a negative indicator, and the allegations of stopping the war are just slogans used by the US administration through media platforms, nothing more.
There is news confirming that the US envoy requested to meet the President of the Sovereignty Council TSC at the airport, and the leadership rejected this request, which is contrary to norms. There is nothing preventing the US envoy from meeting the President of the Sovereignty Council TSC at the guest palace, which received Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, the personal envoy of the Russian President, and a number of Arab and African delegations a few weeks ago.
The US invitation coincides with the militia’s continued violations and what happened in the city of Al-Suki in Sennar by liquidating citizens. What is your comment?
This is the biggest evidence of the militia’s lack of credibility and their concern for the safety of citizens. This affirms that their participation in any peace forum is not reflected in the practices of the militias on the ground. In any area they enter, they practice the worst violations, theft, forced displacement, rape, and other inhuman crimes.
Between the visit of the Ethiopian Prime Minister and the contact between Al-Burhan and Mohammed bin Zayed, we would like to comment on these steps? The conversation that took place between the President of the Sovereignty Council, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces SAF ,Lt. Gen.Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, and the President of the UAE, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed, was the result of Ethiopian mediation led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed during his recent visit to Sudan and meeting with Al-Burhan. Communication continued until the last contact, as revealed by the official media in the country, that the President of the UAE was the one who initiated the contact.
The conversation lasted for 20 minutes, during which Al-Burhan spoke for 18 minutes, during which he emphasized Sudan’s position rejecting the UAE’s intervention and support for the militias with weapons.
As is known, the Sudanese government has filed an official complaint with the UN Security Council against the UAE and its intervention in the war, but the recent contact may have a major impact in reducing tensions between Sudan and the UAE, noting that diplomatic relations are still ongoing between the two countries.
If communication continues and the tripartite meeting that was announced in Addis Ababa or Cairo takes place, a major breakthrough may occur that will be reflected in the internal reality by stopping the war, considering that the UAE is a major player.