Intelligence… The Mind That Precedes the Rifle

As I See 

Adel El-Baz

1

In a private gathering, one statement by a senior and highly respected officer of the armed forces caught my attention:
“The recruitment of Al-Nour Qubba represents an intelligence operation of the highest caliber, and a remarkable achievement for Sudanese intelligence.”

Throughout the public spectacle surrounding Al-Nour Qubba’s reception — and the positive and negative reactions it generated — no credit for this major defection, which followed Keikal’s split and was later succeeded by the Savanna defection, was attributed to any specific entity, as though it had occurred by coincidence.

But dismantling a rebellion from within does not happen by accident. It undoubtedly requires patient, persistent, and intelligent work — work that fully understands that wars are not won only on battlefields, but also by weakening the enemy internally. That is the mission of intelligence services. And this is precisely what Sudanese intelligence has done throughout different eras, often without the public realizing that there exists an invisible army operating outside the spotlight of the media: fighting silently, waging war through information, and achieving its objectives without firing a single bullet.

2

Brigadier General (Ret.) Dr. Mohamed Al-Zein Mohamed Ahmed writes in his valuable work The Hoopoe and the Third Eye: The Philosophy of Intelligence and State Engineering (pp. 144–145), discussing the nature and functions of intelligence work: “Military intelligence is considered one of the most important tools of command and control within the armed forces. It undertakes a range of vital functions that together form an integrated system supporting military decision-making and securing operational superiority on the battlefield. Its primary role begins with the collection, processing, analysis, and distribution of information through surveillance, tracking, verification, and classification operations, before delivering intelligence to different levels of command according to operational and tactical requirements.”

Military intelligence also prepares strategic studies and analyses related to the international environment, the capabilities of adversaries, and military alliances, in addition to monitoring technological developments in weaponry and modern combat methods. Among its most important functions is operational area analysis — known as “intelligence preparation of the battlefield” — which includes the study of geographic, human, and environmental factors to determine risk zones, movement routes, and opportunities for tactical superiority.

Intelligence also plays a central role in preparing “intelligence estimates,” which provide a comprehensive assessment of the enemy’s military and political situation and serve as a foundation for planning and decision-making. Early warning capabilities are among its most critical functions, enabling leadership to anticipate enemy movements and potential threats and to act proactively.

On the operational level, intelligence contributes to understanding the enemy’s structure and order of battle through analyzing force deployment, intentions, centers of gravity, and vulnerabilities. This helps commanders select the most appropriate methods of engagement and achieve qualitative superiority. Intelligence also plays an important role in risk and threat assessment, protecting forces from infiltration and operational surprise.

Another of its major roles is enabling military surprise by concealing the intentions of friendly forces and analyzing the enemy’s intelligence capabilities, in addition to exposing deception and disinformation plans carried out by adversaries and providing analyses that assist leadership in building counterstrategies.

Military intelligence also contributes to assessing the results of strikes and combat operations by measuring enemy losses and evaluating the extent to which strategic objectives have been achieved, thereby allowing operations to be redirected and plans updated according to battlefield realities.
(End of quote.)

3

Modern Sudanese military intelligence emerged from the intelligence structure of the Sudan Defence Force established by the British in 1925. Its modern national form, however, took shape after Sudan’s independence in 1956. With significant institutional expansion during the late 1950s and 1960s, its role grew in the 1970s and reached the peak of its influence during the 1990s, continuing ever since to play a major role within Sudan’s military and political establishment.

Sudanese military intelligence is regarded as one of the most influential institutions within the state due to its direct connection to the military establishment, national security files, and internal and regional wars. Throughout Sudan’s modern history, it has played pivotal roles that extended beyond traditional intelligence gathering to influencing the trajectories of war, politics, and regional security.

Its role became particularly prominent in managing Sudan’s prolonged wars and insurgencies, especially in South Sudan, Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile. Its tasks included gathering field intelligence, infiltrating rebel movements, identifying supply lines, operating sources inside conflict zones, and analyzing the capabilities and movements of adversaries. During the southern civil war, it gained a reputation as one of the most experienced agencies in managing “peripheral wars” and operating within complex tribal and geographic environments.

It also became known for its ability to infiltrate armed movements by recruiting sources within them, managing divisions and defections, and employing psychological warfare. As a result, many rebel movements experienced repeated internal splits that were widely believed to have been influenced, directly or indirectly, by military intelligence.

Within the military establishment itself, military intelligence played an important role in protecting the army from coups and foreign infiltration. Owing to its proximity to the center of decision-making within the armed forces, it sometimes became part of the arrangements surrounding political transitions themselves. Indeed, during every revolution Sudan has witnessed, it played the decisive role in presenting the final assessment of the situation upon which the decision to side with political change was often based.

As the nature of warfare evolved across multiple fronts, its role expanded to include special operations and unconventional warfare, such as reconnaissance behind enemy lines, managing special units, directing precision strikes, operating local allied forces, and conducting psychological and media warfare.

Regionally, Sudanese military intelligence became involved in complex files relating to Libya, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, South Sudan, the Sahel, and the Horn of Africa. In many cases, its security channels proved more active and influential than official diplomatic channels.

4

Following the outbreak of war in Sudan in 2023 between the army and the Rapid Support Forces, the role of military intelligence returned forcefully to the forefront — particularly in tracking supply networks, conducting electronic surveillance, gathering drone intelligence, uncovering cells and collaborators, managing battlefield information, and securing command-and-control systems to support military decision-making at all levels.

For this reason, it has often been described as “the deep state within the military institution,” owing to its closeness to the leadership and its access to sensitive sovereign and power-balance files. Yet the secrecy surrounding its nature often makes it difficult to distinguish between confirmed facts and circulating narratives regarding the true extent of its influence.

5

Today, Sudanese military intelligence operates in a different and multi-front environment, facing major and highly complex challenges that go far beyond the patterns of conventional warfare. The battle is no longer confined to direct field confrontation; it has expanded into cyberspace, information warfare, drone operations, cross-border supply networks, and regional and international interventions.

This reality compels the institution to continuously develop its tools and analytical and technical capabilities in order to keep pace with the evolving nature of conflict and to secure the state and its institutions within one of the most unstable security environments in the region.