The “Egg and Stone” Paradox Is No War Tactic

By Maj. Gen. (Rtd.) Osama Mohamed Ahmed Abdel-Salam

There is no good in us if we fail to say it plainly: the so-called “egg and stone” paradox is not, and never was, a tactic for war.

An egg and a stone are not twins, nor counterparts, nor even vaguely alike. They do not form a harmonious pair. They are irreconcilable—like water and fire, or rain and thorn. Yet a common proverb says of someone “he plays with the egg and the stone.” Its roots go back to an ancient Egyptian contest where young men tried to throw eggs without breaking them. One contestant deceived the judges by using stones shaped like eggs to avoid breakage and claim the prize.

The phrase has since described the cunning trickster: someone resourceful, sly, and clever in manipulation—balancing contradictions, exploiting fragility and hardness at once, maneuvering language and circumstance to his own advantage.

But Sudan’s war of dignity is no playground for such games. This struggle, led by the people and fronted by the Sudanese Armed Forces, has drawn clear lines. It is not a field where neutrality or ambiguity can survive. One side seeks to dismantle the state—mercenaries and militias financed from abroad, burning, looting, and killing. The other side fights to preserve Sudan’s sovereignty and dignity, mobilizing the nation’s full strength. There is no middle ground, no “gray zone” where one can hide behind claims of neutrality.

Those who pretend at neutrality in this war only mask their alignment with the rebels. They are embarrassed supporters, dressing their stance in the false modesty of silence. Even within the political factions allied to the insurgents, splits have emerged, though all remain tied by complicity.

In such a moment, the entire machinery of the state—military, economic, diplomatic, social—must be directed toward defeating the militia and dismantling its project, while exposing and deterring its foreign patrons. Yet troubling signs remain: statements from senior officials in the Sovereign Council and the government suggest that sympathizers of the militia still sit within state institutions, playing the role of a “fifth column.” Their mission is not to fight openly but to delay, distract, and weaken the war effort.

Most crucial of all is the role of the Commander-in-Chief, Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. As head of state and supreme commander, he is meant to rally the nation’s energies for total war against the militia and its backers. But doubts linger: does he fight with the full resolve the hour demands, or does he, too, “play with the egg and the stone,” hedging between opposites—drawing benefits from the sacrifices of the army while leaving room for political maneuver with the rebels’ allies?

Sudanese remember him across four phases: as chair of the Transitional Military Council after Ibn Auf’s resignation; as partner with the civilian coalition during the transitional council; as head of state after breaking with those same civilians; and now, since April 15, 2023, as wartime leader in a country aflame. Each phase required its own prescriptions. Yet a common thread runs through them all: his tendency toward caution, delay, silence—and at times, the calculated juggling of contradictions.

But Sudan is no longer in an era where such political games can be tolerated. Millions have been displaced, livelihoods destroyed, civilians subjected to atrocities, cities reduced to rubble. The luxury of “egg and stone” politics is gone. What remains is the stark duty to destroy the rebellion and its foreign sponsors, to reclaim every inch of Sudanese soil, and to restore security by force of arms, not by the cosmetics of “governments of hope” or hollow dialogue.

Victory belongs to the Armed Forces and their allies, to the national project that defends Sudan’s existence.
Shame and defeat belong to the militia, its patrons, and its project of chaos.

God is great—and glory to Sudan.
God is great, and may the eyes of cowards never sleep.