The Kampala Declaration: An African Attempt to Redefine the War in Sudan

Report – Sudan Events

First: Political Background

Since the outbreak of war in Sudan, a dominant international narrative has framed the conflict as an internal confrontation between two military factions. However, as the war has evolved, with regional interventions expanding and flows of mercenaries and weapons crossing borders, African actors have begun to reassess this framing, describing the crisis as a conflict with clear regional and international dimensions.

Within this context, the Kampala Declaration emerged as an organized African effort to challenge this narrative, shifting the description of the war from a narrow domestic conflict to one characterized by external aggression and violations of sovereignty, thereby placing direct responsibility on regional actors for the continuation of the war.

Second: Core Principles and Content of the Declaration

The declaration is built around three central arguments:

1. The war is not civil:
The declaration asserts that the conflict in Sudan is the result of indirect foreign invasion, carried out through mercenary militias comprising fighters from more than 17 countries.

2. Dismantling the state through militias:
The signatories argue that the militarization of the economy and the normalization of militia rule—particularly the Rapid Support Forces—have led to the collapse of state institutions and turned Sudan into a hub of cross-border chaos.

3. The UAE as a key actor:
The declaration assigns primary responsibility to the United Arab Emirates for financing, arming, recruiting, and transporting fighters, describing this role as a direct hostile intervention amounting to a violation of the sovereignty of a UN member state.

Third: The Humanitarian and Human Rights Dimension

The Kampala Declaration devotes significant attention to violations, highlighting:

Acts of genocide in Darfur (El Geneina, El Fasher).

Ethnic cleansing and systematic sexual violence.

The destruction of the productive base and the transformation of the economy into a war-and-looting economy.

It calls for those responsible for these crimes to be referred to international justice mechanisms, with particular emphasis on dismantling the financial networks sustaining the war.

Fourth: Regional and International Messages

The declaration delivers clear messages:

To the African Union: the need to lead an independent African mediation process free from external tutelage.

To the UN Security Council: an end to the policy of silence and a shift from crisis management to holding external actors accountable.

To African peoples: what is happening in Sudan today could be repeated elsewhere if not confronted collectively.

Fifth: Implications of the Declaration

The Kampala Declaration represents:

A shift in African discourse from passive neutrality to openly naming the parties involved in the conflict.

A political and legal foundation that can be leveraged in international advocacy and pressure campaigns.

An indicator of growing African awareness of the dangers posed by proxy wars to state sovereignty.

Conclusion

The Kampala Declaration does not offer an immediate solution to the war, but it redefines the problem—from an internal crisis to a question of African sovereignty. In this shift lies its political significance, as it places external interventions—rather than domestic power balances alone—at the center of the debate over Sudan’s future.