Sudan Between Emirati Oversight and Crisis Internationalization: When Psychological Warfare Becomes a Tool of Political Engineering

By: Loay Ismail Majzoub

From a security and military perspective, the unfolding developments in Sudan have transcended the boundaries of an internal armed conflict. The country has become a battleground for strategic engineering, orchestrated by external actors employing unconventional tools. The abrupt cancellation of the “Quartet” meetings on Sudan, the increasingly aggressive media and political rhetoric of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), and the opaque maneuverings within regional decision-making circles all point to Sudan entering a phase of “compound pressure”—where kinetic warfare intersects with psychological and intelligence warfare.

1. Diplomatic Disruption as a Security Tactic

The cancellation of the Quartet meetings cannot be understood outside the broader security context. These meetings represented a key point of engagement between the Sudanese military and international stakeholders. Their suspension appears to be a calculated move aimed at dismantling any emerging international consensus in support of Sudan’s national institutions, creating a vacuum ripe for regional powers—particularly the UAE—to introduce alternative, and potentially destabilizing, diplomatic and security arrangements.

2. The UAE as an Unofficial Security Actor

Accumulating evidence suggests that the UAE’s role in Sudan has evolved well beyond political or diplomatic support. It now involves direct logistical assistance to a rebel militia, securing supply routes, and even establishing media and digital platforms designed to distort public perception. From a security standpoint, this constitutes a form of indirect military intervention and poses a serious threat to Sudan’s sovereign decision-making structure.

3. The Internal Front and the Erosion of Defensive Identity

Recent statements by the RSF leader were not mere slips of the tongue. Efforts to strip Sudan of its Arab identity and recast it within a “raw African” framework fall under what military psychology refers to as the “dismantling of a state’s defensive identity.” These tactics aim to disorient the military and weaken national unity by promoting alternative narratives that fracture the internal front. This is no longer a war of weapons alone—it is a battle over the national story.

4. Refugees as a Strategic Pressure Lever

The presence of a large Darfuri refugee population in Europe—often under the guise of humanitarian organizations and intelligence-linked networks—is being leveraged in an ongoing effort to internationalize Sudan’s crisis. There is a concerted push to position this diaspora as a political force claiming to represent Sudan’s reality, lobbying for post-state entities. In the medium term, this risks undermining the legitimacy of the central government and paving the way for externally endorsed alternative structures.

5. Israeli Infiltration Through Chaos

Following the failure of normalization efforts due to political resistance, Israel now appears to be attempting to secure a foothold in Sudan through the “chaos window,” in coordination with complicit Gulf actors. From an intelligence standpoint, Sudan presents an ideal setting for a proxy confrontation between Ankara and Tel Aviv—cost-effective and strategically potent—thanks to its porous borders, abundance of unofficial actors, and weakened sovereign oversight.

Security and Military Recommendations:

1. Redefine the Enemy: The UAE is no longer a peace partner; it is an active player in the dismantling of Sudan from within.

2. Adopt a Complex Soft-Offensive Strategy: This includes diplomatic counter-efforts, disruption of foreign-funded media operations, and exposing regional supply chains to international scrutiny.

3. Fortify the Internal Front: Through clear national messaging that reaffirms the state-building project and isolates proponents of political and ethnic fragmentation.

4. Counter International Legitimization of Militias: By mobilizing legal and human rights platforms to highlight war crimes and foreign complicity.

5. Establish a Parallel Regional Alliance: Engage with friendly powers to balance negative interventions and reintegrate Sudan into a constructive regional framework.

Conclusion:

What is happening in Sudan is not a mere internal political dispute—it is an attempt to impose security guardianship fueled by money, weapons, and psychological manipulation. In this context, the national army’s neutrality or hesitation to name and confront external threats serves only to give foreign actors a free hand to reshape Sudan in their image.

Sovereignty is not granted through conditional understandings—it is seized through firm resolve and a deeply rooted combat doctrine.