Will the Army Lose the War?

The American magazine The National Interest states, “America is a superpower, but that does not mean it cannot be defeated in war.” It adds, “Defeat can be a step toward eventual victory.”

This statement appears in an analytical research article discussing the defeats faced by the world’s most powerful armies. The study references the British army’s defeats, describing it as an empire-spanning force, ruling vast territories over centuries. Despite its might, it suffered defeats at the hands of various armies and armed movements worldwide, including the American resistance during the War of Independence, as well as against the Russians, French, Zulu fighters, and others in Africa, Afghanistan, Japan, and Germany. These defeats forced the British army to withdraw after suffering heavy losses.

The study also highlights the U.S. army’s defeat in Vietnam—a historic loss that altered global politics—and its retreat from Afghanistan in a manner reminiscent of its withdrawal from Vietnam’s jungles. In both cases, the U.S. left allies to face adversaries alone, enduring suffering and annihilation. The infamous Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia also demonstrates the humiliation faced by the U.S. military, where Somali resistance dragged American soldiers’ bodies through the streets, forcing an expedited withdrawal. Even the U.N.’s cover could not mask the colonial agenda behind such interventions.

The Sudanese army, with its deep experience and resilience, ranks highly among regional and global forces. Over 80 years, it has been embroiled in relentless wars, compelled by constitutional duty to uphold the state’s sovereignty. These conflicts began with Sudanese soldiers participating in Muhammad Ali Pasha’s campaigns in 1854 and 1856 and extended to their involvement in the Crimean War, the Mexican conflicts, and World War I. Throughout history, the Sudanese army demonstrated exceptional stamina and combat prowess.

Domestically, the Sudanese military was deeply engaged in the protracted Anyanya war (1955–1972), one of the longest and bloodiest conflicts of the 20th century, resulting in immense human and material loss. Although a peace agreement (Addis Ababa Accord) brought a temporary truce, war resumed after two decades, culminating in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005).

However, Sudan did not enjoy lasting peace, as rebellion erupted in Darfur in 2003. What began as minor skirmishes escalated into devastating wars fueled by personal ambitions, external interference, and the opportunism of war profiteers. The proliferation of armed movements, often pursuing fabricated grievances, turned conflict into a commercial enterprise.

The Sudanese army, despite decades of forced engagement in war, has preserved the nation’s sovereignty. Its current battle is unprecedented, involving urban warfare with militias that lack basic military ethics. These groups, comprising criminals, unemployed individuals, and even children, hide among civilians, turning cities into battlegrounds.

The historical narrative underscores the army’s professional resilience. Temporary setbacks in battle are natural in any war, as history illustrates. For example, George Washington’s army retreated in the Battle of Brooklyn but ultimately triumphed. Washington once remarked, “The farther you prolong victory, the more inevitable it becomes for your enemy to admit defeat.”

The message is clear: armies can lose battles but win wars. This is the essence of professionalism. The Sudanese army’s initial success in thwarting coups and maintaining constitutional order reflects its enduring spirit. The ultimate victory lies in rejecting the very notion of defeat.

To be continued…