A crisis in WANA that no one talks about : Valley Vision

‘Large and multi-ethnic Sudan is no stranger to civil strife and misgovernance’. General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan at a function 
| Photo Credit: AFP

First, a trick question: Where in West Asia-North Africa (WANA) in 2023 did a no-holds-barred conflict morph into the world’s worst humanitarian crisis? The correct answer is not Gaza, but Sudan.

The conflict between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Force (RSF) led by Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemayti (“My Protector”) has devastated Sudan. The estimates vary widely, but the figures are horrific: up to 1,50,000 deaths, nearly 10 million people (nearly a fifth of Sudan’s population) displaced, of whom 2.5 million have been forced abroad. These figures are nearly four times those of Gaza. Sudan, a Nile-irrigated agrarian economy exporting food, is now tethering on the brink of a major famine and epidemics such as cholera.

A history of strife

Large and multi-ethnic Sudan is no stranger to civil strife and misgovernance. Since independence in 1956, the country has had 15 military coups and two civil wars, killing 1.5 million people and resulting in the eventual secession of South Sudan in 2011. For the past two decades, a conflict in the western region of Darfur has been waged by the infamous Janjaweed militia, the RSF’s precursor, against local non-Arab Muslims, killing over 2,00,000 and displacing two million.

The genesis of the current crisis lies in the 30 years of autocracy by dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir. He was overthrown in a military coup in April 2019 after months of popular protests. The Transitional Military Council signed framework agreements with citizens’ groups to create a joint military-civilian sovereignty council and draft a new constitution. However, this civilian-military co-habitation collapsed after wobbling for two years, leading to a military coup in October 2021 that installed Gen. al-Burhan as the head of state. Although street protests demanding complete civilian rule and international pressures revived a power-sharing framework, it proved no better. Simultaneously, the RSF’s rejection of the December 2022 draft framework proposing its integration into the Sudanese Army pushed the multi-pronged chaos over the edge. On April 15, 2023, an armed conflict commenced between an estimated 3,00,000-strong SAF and the RSF with nearly 1,00,000 well-armed fighters. Beneath the ideological and ethnic trappings are the unadulterated ambitions of the two warlords. The ongoing mayhem has completely drowned the raison d’etre of the crisis: the demand for civilian rule.

For the past 16 months, a civil war has waged over much of Sudan, which is nearly two-thirds the size of India. Despite its larger strength and air force, SAF could not dominate the conflict. It had to evacuate the national capital Khartoum and relocate to Port Sudan. In reverse, two decades of ethnic cleansing by the RSF and Janjaweed in Darfur and elsewhere in Sudan have stiffened the resistance of several ethnic groups which have sided with SAF. The RSF has had some success in south-central regions.

Playground for foreign interests

For pecuniary and geostrategic reasons, foreign interests have fished in Sudan’s troubled waters. Sudan shares land borders with seven countries and a coastline along the Red Sea. It also has plenty of natural resources such as crude, gold and large fertile land. The war has created strange bedfellows: Egypt, Sudan’s big brother, has supported SAF, as has Iran, Cairo’s arch enemy. Russia’s Wagner group critically supported the RSF, while the Kremlin has pressed SAF for a naval base in Port Sudan. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) emerged as the RSF’s top backer, supplying it with weapons and laundering its gold. Chad and Libya’s Gen. Khalifah Haftar have also anchored the RSF. Mercenaries from all over — from South Sudan to Russia and Ukraine — have joined in the melee, mostly backing the RSF. Ethiopia and Eritrea are waiting in the wings. Gen. Burhan has earned some brownie points by re-establishing normal ties with the United States and recognising Israel.

While several attempts have been made by Saudi Arabia, the U.S., the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and the African Union to arrange a ceasefire, none has succeeded largely due to the obduracy of the recalcitrant belligerents. The UN Security Council took nearly 11 months to pass its only resolution on the Sudan conflict which was more aspirational than prescriptive. The International Criminal Court has only made some initial moves to investigate the war crimes in Sudan. The U.S.-sponsored peace talks in Geneva last month had an inauspicious beginning with the SAF staying out, objecting to the presence of the UAE. Although these 10-day talks concluded on August 23 without reaching a ceasefire deal, the belligerents agreed to open three corridors for desperately needed humanitarian relief.

Indian stakes

Although India evacuated its nationals from Sudan early in the conflict, it still has several reasons to be concerned with the situation in that large and friendly country. In 2022-23, India’s direct trade with Sudan reached a record figure of $2,034 million; It was 9:1 in India’s favour with a large market for sugars, and petroleum products. There were also substantive indirect Indian exports via the UAE and Saudi Arabia. In 2003, India made its first major investment abroad in the upstream sector in Sudan cumulatively worth nearly $2.3 billion and Indian President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam’s state visit to Sudan, in October of that year, was a grand success. India has also cumulatively committed nearly $700 million in lines of credit to Sudan. Thanks to students and medical tourists from Sudan, people-to-people ties have remained strong. Negatively, a protracted conflict in Sudan can revive the latent Islamic militancy, potentially threatening India’s interests.

Mahesh Sachdev is a former Indian Ambassador