The Sudanese Army’s Miracle
By Ali Askouri
Has the Sudanese army (including all forces and groups that fought alongside it, to avoid lengthy explanations) achieved a miracle with its imminent victory in this war?
In this article, we attempt to answer this question and leave the judgment to the reader.
Since 1955, the Sudanese army has faced multiple wars of a similar nature—an organized army fighting against one or more rebel groups in intermittent military operations, known in military literature as a low-intensity war.
The army won many battles in these wars and lost some. Despite their prolonged duration, the army managed to confine them to specific areas. This was partly due to the rebels’ reluctance to expand beyond their social and geographical bases. As a result, most regions of Sudan remained unaffected by the fighting.
These wars were characterized by attrition—draining economic surpluses to fund the war effort and depleting human resources (soldiers and officers). Ultimately, this forced the ruling authority to seek ways to end the attrition by reaching peace agreements with the rebel groups.
Unfortunately, past experiences have shown that the demands raised by rebel movements—those for which they originally fought—vanish as soon as their leaders secure high-ranking positions in the government. This reinforces the reality that most rebel leaders were more concerned with personal power than with achieving justice in governance and wealth distribution for their regions. To date, no rebel leader has ever declined a government position when offered one.
Unlike previous conflicts, the war waged by the Dagalo militia was entirely different. Its leader was already at the pinnacle of power and had access to enormous wealth across the country. Additionally, he was allowed to deploy his forces throughout Sudan rather than being confined to a single geographic region.
Thus, this war was not about marginalized communities, as previous rebel movements and the militia itself have claimed. The primary goal was complete control of the state.
The Sudanese army faced a full-scale war that spanned thousands of kilometers. Unlike previous conflicts, where natural barriers such as rivers, forests, valleys, mountains, sand dunes, and swamps hindered military movements, this war introduced new challenges unfamiliar to the army. It was fought within cities, amidst buildings, alleys, and narrow streets—urban warfare. This was an entirely new experience for the army. Moreover, the war covered an unprecedentedly vast area.
The breadth of this war and the army’s success in it, in my opinion, constitute a miracle—especially for an army from a developing nation or a so-called Third World country, as the World Bank and Western nations condescendingly label us!
This war took place across all Sudanese states except for Kassala, where I found no reports of attacks.
The total area where the army fought spans 1,920,722 square kilometers. To help the reader grasp the scale of this space, it is equivalent to the combined size of Slovakia, Estonia, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Bhutan, Guinea-Bissau, Armenia, Albania, Equatorial Guinea, Burundi, Rwanda, Djibouti, the Republic of the Congo, Germany, the Philippines, Hungary, and Uganda. The total area of these countries amounts to 1,920,038 square kilometers.
Across this vast expanse, the Sudanese army fought and emerged victorious. Despite the militia’s fierce resistance, it utterly failed to sever the army’s supply lines to its units. These supply lines—delivering ammunition, equipment, reinforcements, medical evacuations, food, and medicine—were crucial for sustaining combat. Any military leader understands that uninterrupted supply chains are the key to victory.
The only historical precedent for a war fought over such a vast territory was the Nazi army’s occupation of most of Europe during World War II. The area over which the Nazis waged war exceeded 3,250,000 square kilometers. However, the fundamental difference is that the Nazi army was an invading force, whereas the Sudanese army was defending its homeland. The Nazis had meticulously prepared for an offensive war, while our army had to defend itself against an unexpected large-scale assault.
Given the course of this war and the army’s imminent victory, our military has become one of the few in history to conduct operations over such an extensive theater—excluding colonial wars, which were different in nature and stretched over long periods.
Nowhere in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, or even modern European history (except for the Nazi army) has any military waged a war on such a scale.
With such an army and such capabilities, how can Sudan be placed on the same level as countries like Chad, Kenya, or even Ethiopia? How can we be equated with the African Union itself, to which some of our politicians rush at every opportunity, with or without cause?
Some people fail to grasp the strength of our army and the potential of our people, and thus they undermine our pride and status.
Those who do not comprehend the magnitude of our army’s achievement should not take the lead.
We, alone, are an African Union. We deserve to lead Africa—whether others accept it or not. Do not underestimate your country or the accomplishments of its army, my dear friends.
We must acknowledge and internalize the significance of this victory so that the unworthy do not dare rise above us and so that “thorns do not grow among crops.”
Glory and immortality to our martyrs, victory and honor to our people, and may the African Union be put to shame!
This land is ours.
(As published in “Sudanese Echoes”)
