Ali Karti, SG of Sudan’s Islamic Movement, widely seen as a mastermind of Sudan's war, has now announced a truce with RSF will never be accepted

NOTE from Sudan Watch Editor: Dame Rosalind Marsden in the following analysis 'Sudan's forgotten war: A new diplomatic push is needed' says there needs to be a concerted diplomatic push at the highest level: "the aim must be to change the calculations of the generals and counter the influence of hard-line Islamists from the Bashir-era who are blocking negotiations. This requires pressing for a coordinated mediation process to prevent warring parties’ forum-shopping between mediation initiatives; targeting the financial flows and military supplies fuelling the war; and supporting efforts to unify those Sudanese working for the goal of democratic transition."

It is difficult to see why Dame Rosalind is recommending "a coordinated mediation process" as even she says "Ali Karti, the Secretary-General of Sudan’s Islamic Movement, who is widely seen as a mastermind of the war, has now announced that a truce with the RSF will never be accepted." 

Many Sudanese civilians online are saying they don't want Sudan to be led by Gen. Burhan and his Islamist regime nor by Hemeti and his terrorist militia. I've not seen a solution. Maybe the people could join hands in peace.

Note, in her analysis Dame Rosalind rightly publicises the Emergency Response Rooms, aka ERRs, by saying: "Donors will also have to step up to address the spiralling food crisis, by reducing the UN funding gap and supporting grassroots first responders in the Emergency Response Rooms.' 

______________________________

From Chatham House

EXPERT COMMENT
By Dame Rosalind Marsden

Associate Fellow, Africa Programme 

Email Rosalind  Twitter

Dated Thursday, 14 March 2024 - here is a copy in full:

Sudan’s forgotten war: A new diplomatic push is needed

After nearly a year of devastating conflict, there is little sign of a ceasefire. Concerted high-level international pressure is needed to change the calculations of the generals and support a democratic transition.

Image — People rally in Wad Madani, Sudan, in December 2023. 

(Photo by AFP via Getty Images)

On 8 March, the UN Security Council adopted a UK-drafted resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities in Sudan during the month of Ramadan, a sustainable resolution to the conflict through dialogue, compliance with international humanitarian law and unhindered humanitarian access.

Eleven months into the war, this is the first time that the Council has been able to agree on a resolution. The mandate of the UN Panel of Experts that monitors the sanctions regime in Darfur was also renewed by the Council. Does this signify hope that efforts to end the war might gather momentum? Or is Sudan likely to face a protracted conflict?

The war between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) led by General Abdel Fatah Al Burhan and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (known as ‘Hemedti’) is a competition for power and resources between rival factions of the regular armed forces.

But it is also rooted in Sudan’s long history of internal conflict, marginalization of the peripheries and lack of accountability for atrocity crimes. Both the SAF’s officer corps and the RSF are creations of former President Omer al-Bashir’s regime. 

Each has shown disregard for the lives of Sudanese civilians by waging war in densely populated urban areas. The scale of destruction is unprecedented in Sudan’s modern history.

With the world’s attention focused on Gaza and Ukraine, the war receives woefully little high-level political, parliamentary or international media attention, raising serious questions about double standards in dealing with global crises, particularly conflicts in Africa.

A humanitarian catastrophe

Sudan is suffering from a humanitarian disaster, with a looming famine and the world’s biggest displacement crisis: 8 million people are newly displaced inside or outside the country, in addition to over 3 million displaced by previous conflicts.

The head of the World Food Programme has warned that the war risks creating the world’s largest hunger crisis. Yet the UN’s Humanitarian Response Plan for Sudan is only 4 per cent funded.

The conflict has the potential to destabilize already fragile neighbouring countries, create large new migration flows to Europe, and attract extremist groups.

Meanwhile, regional actors are fighting a proxy war in the country, giving military, financial and political support to the warring parties. 

The involvement of Russia and Iran has given the war a geopolitical dimension linked to Putin’s war in Ukraine – partly funded with Sudanese gold – and competition for influence on the Red Sea coast.

Food as a weapon of war

Both RSF and SAF forces have used hunger as a weapon of war. The RSF has looted humanitarian warehouses and besieged cities. 

The SAF-controlled Humanitarian Aid Commission has systematically withheld authorization for crossline movement of life-saving aid to RSF-controlled areas.

One limited outcome from recent international pressure has been the partial reversal of the SAF’s ban on cross-border humanitarian access from Chad into Darfur. The de facto SAF authorities in Port Sudan have agreed to open limited border crossings from Chad and South Sudan. However, MSF International have criticized this as a partial solution at best.

The UN will need to monitor implementation to ensure neutrality in the distribution of aid, while intensifying pressure for unhindered cross-border and crossline humanitarian access.

Donors will also have to step up to address the spiralling food crisis, by reducing the UN funding gap and supporting grassroots first responders in the Emergency Response Rooms.

Growing pressure for a cessation of hostilities

The fact that the UN Secretary-General, the UN Security Council, the African Union, and the League of Arab States joined forces to call for a Ramadan truce, represents a significant increase in pressure on the warring parties.

Nevertheless, Ramadan has started with further fierce fighting. It is unclear how the Security Council expected a truce to take effect without prior diplomatic engagement to agree an implementation and monitoring mechanism. 

Command and control is fragmented on both sides and the warring parties have failed to abide by previous temporary truces negotiated through the Saudi/US-sponsored Jeddah Platform.

Moreover, Sudan’s security state has no history of respecting the month of Ramadan: the current war began during the holy month on 15 April 2023, and peaceful protestors were brutally dispersed in Khartoum on 3 June 2019.

Burhan cautiously commended the Secretary-General’s proposal for a Ramadan truce, but the Islamist-controlled Ministry of Foreign Affairs and SAF’s General Yasir al Atta poured cold water on the idea by announcing a list of preconditions amounting to surrender by the RSF.

8 million

Number of newly displaced people as a result of the war in Sudan.

This response follows a familiar pattern: any indication by Burhan of readiness to negotiate is immediately negated by Islamist elements of the Bashir regime, who hope to return to power on the back of an SAF victory. 

Ali Karti, the Secretary-General of Sudan’s Islamic Movement, who is widely seen as a mastermind of the war, has now announced that a truce with the RSF will never be accepted.

Both sides still seem determined to gain the upper hand militarily. The SAF, hitherto on the back foot, has launched an offensive to regain lost territory in Omdurman and Gezira state, supported by Iranian drones, Islamist militias, the Special Operations Forces of the Bashir-era Intelligence Service, former Darfuri rebels and armed civilians. 

The RSF, whose human rights violations have alienated much of the population, welcomed the UN’s call for a truce, but are also engaged in recruitment, particularly among Arab tribes in Darfur.

The longer the war continues, the greater the risk that it will evolve into a full-scale ethnicized civil war, and that the country will be engulfed by famine.

A concerted diplomatic push

Concerted diplomacy at the highest level is therefore urgently needed. The aim must be to change the calculations of the generals and counter the influence of hard-line Islamists from the Bashir-era who are blocking negotiations.

This requires pressing for a coordinated mediation process to prevent warring parties’ forum-shopping between mediation initiatives; targeting the financial flows and military supplies fuelling the war; and supporting efforts to unify those Sudanese working for the goal of democratic transition.

Civilians are the main victims of the war and should be involved in each stage of any peace process. They, not the generals, should shape Sudan’s post-war transition. Those responsible for atrocities must be held accountable.  

There has been some recent evolution in regional dynamics. Egypt and the UAE, who have been backing opposite sides, co-facilitated RSF/SAF talks in Manama in January, alongside the US, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

There are also signs of a stronger international commitment to active diplomatic engagement. The AU has created a High-Level Panel on Sudan, while the US has appointed a dedicated Special Envoy. The Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General has been empowered by the Security Council to complement and coordinate regional peace efforts.

But a strong push is now needed to silence the guns and push the warring parties to resume talks under the Jeddah Platform, preferably in an expanded format. More visible, high-level political commitment is badly needed, if the conflict in Sudan is not to remain a forgotten war.

This article was produced with support from the Cross-Border Conflict Evidence, Policy and Trends (XCEPT) research programme, funded by UK International Development. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.

___

Postscript from Sudan Watch Editor:

Dame Rosalind Marsden was the EU Special Representative for Sudan from September 2010 until October 2013. Before joining the EU, she had a long career in the British diplomatic service, including postings as Consul-General in Basra, British Ambassador to Sudan and British Ambassador to Afghanistan. 

She has also served as Head of the United Nations Department and Director (Asia-Pacific) in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London. 

Earlier in her career she served twice in the British Embassy in Tokyo and spent two years on secondment to the private sector, working in the corporate finance department of an investment bank. 

She received her BA in Modern History from Somerville College, Oxford and her D.Phil from St Antony’s College, Oxford.

View original: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2024/03/sudans-forgotten-war-new-diplomatic-push-needed

___

Related 

Chatham House - 18 December 2023 

How a transnational approach can better manage the conflict in Sudan

Approaching conflict as a national issue sidelines a complex web of transnational influences and threatens prospects for sustainable peace.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/12/how-transnational-approach-can-better-manage-conflict-sudan

___

UN News - 3 February 2024

Youth-led ‘emergency rooms’ shine rays of hope in war-torn Sudan

© ERR Emergency response rooms are finding innovative approaches to providing rapid assistance to millions facing war in Sudan. 

https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/02/1146187

END

Sudan: UNSC Vote on a Draft Resolution (Preamble)

"It seems that on 5 March, the Sudanese government sent a letter to the Security Council, conveying its decision to facilitate the entry and delivery of humanitarian aid through several routes, including from Chad through the Tina border crossing; from South Sudan through the Renk border crossing; and through humanitarian flights accessing airports in the cities of Al Fasher, Kadugli, and Al Obeid. The draft resolution in blue includes language welcoming the Sudanese government’s announcement as a positive step." Read more.

From UN Security Council
What's In Blue 
Dated Friday, 8 March 2024, 19:25 GMT - here is a copy in full:

Sudan: Vote on a Draft Resolution

This afternoon (8 March), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities in Sudan during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which starts on 10 March. The draft text was proposed by the UK, the penholder on Sudan. Following the vote on this draft resolution, the Council will vote on a draft resolution extending the mandate of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1591 Sudan Sanctions Committee.

The UK circulated a one-page zero draft to Council members on Monday (4 March), inviting comments on the text until the next day (5 March). The penholder subsequently circulated a revised draft text on Wednesday (6 March) and put it under silence procedure until yesterday (7 March). Russia broke silence, after which some members submitted additional comments. Russia apparently expressed reservations about the need for a Council resolution and proposed a draft presidential statement as an alternative. The penholder subsequently amended the draft resolution, taking into account additional comments and incorporating some elements from Russia’s proposed presidential statement, and put the revised draft text directly into blue yesterday evening.

The draft resolution in blue calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities during the month of Ramadan and for all warring parties to seek a sustainable resolution to the conflict through dialogue. It also calls on all parties to ensure the removal of any obstructions to the delivery of aid and to enable full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access, including cross-border and cross-line, and to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law and the “Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan”, which was signed by the warring parties in Jeddah on 11 May 2023 with the facilitation of Saudi Arabia and the US.

Over the last 11 months, Sudan has been grappling with the devastating political, security, and humanitarian consequences of fighting that erupted on 15 April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, Sudan’s military leader and chairperson of the Transitional Sovereignty Council, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (known as Hemeti). 

As at 16 February, more than 14,600 people had reportedly been killed since the onset of the conflict, according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that collects conflict-related data. 

OCHA’s 23 February Humanitarian Update noted that approximately 8.1 million people have been displaced since the start of the conflict, of whom 1.8 million have fled to neighbouring countries, including the Central African Republic (CAR), Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, and South Sudan. 

In addition, according to the World Food Programme, nearly 18 million people are facing acute food insecurity in Sudan, including almost five million at emergency hunger levels. (For background and more information, see the Sudan brief in our March 2024 Monthly Forecast and our 7 March What’s in Blue story.)

The fighting has continued unabated despite several calls for a ceasefire from regional stakeholders and the broader international community. In his remarks during a Security Council meeting on the situation in Sudan held yesterday, Secretary-General António Guterres cautioned that the Sudanese conflict “could ignite regional instability of dramatic proportions, from the Sahel to the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea”. 

He added that there have been renewed offensives in several states, including Khartoum and Al Jazirah, and that the hostilities could expand further east. Guterres expressed alarm about calls for arming civilians and popular mobilisation activities in various states and took note of the involvement of other armed groups, primarily in Darfur and South Kordofan states. All these developments “are pouring fuel on the fire for an even more serious fragmentation of the country, a deepening of intra- and inter-communal tensions, and more ethnic violence”, Guterres said.

In light of the upcoming occasion of Ramadan, Guterres called on the warring parties to observe a cessation of hostilities, a call which most Council members supported in their statements at yesterday’s meeting. Algeria, speaking on behalf of the members of the “A3 plus one” grouping (Algeria, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Guyana), called on the warring parties to declare an immediate ceasefire, to put aside their differences, and to use the opportunity of Ramadan to exercise restraint for ensuring a durable peace in Sudan.

Leaders of several regional and intergovernmental organisations have also called on the Sudanese warring parties to observe a ceasefire during Ramadan. In a 6 March statement, League of Arab States (LAS) Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit urged all the parties to pursue efforts towards peace and dialogue.

He expressed the LAS’ commitment to support efforts to restore peace and stability in Sudan. In a communiqué released earlier today, African Union (AU) Commission Chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat called on the warring parties to observe a ceasefire across Sudan during Ramadan, saying that this could help facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to civilians in need.

In his statement during yesterday’s Council meeting, Sudan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Al-Harith Idriss al-Harith Mohamed, conveyed al-Burhan’s message commending Guterres’ appeal for a cessation of hostilities during Ramadan. However, while expressing scepticism about the implementation of a cessation of hostilities in light of continuing attacks by the RSF, he said that “[a]ll those who would like to see that appeal transformed into action are welcome if they would like to present a mechanism for implementation”.

While Council members share concerns about the devastating effects of the ongoing conflict in Sudan, they have diverging views on the tools that the Council should use to address the situation. 

Throughout the negotiations, some members, including China and Russia, apparently pushed back against the need for a Council resolution and instead suggested adopting a presidential statement or a press statement, products which require consensus among Council members. It seems that these members argued for the need to have Council consensus on this subject and to respect the views of the concerned country. 

Commenting on the UK’s proposed draft resolution, China said in its remarks at yesterday’s Council meeting that “the Council’s actions should be conducive to diplomacy and avoid exacerbating tensions”. Despite these objections, the UK decided to continue negotiating the resolution and to put it to a vote today.

The draft resolution in blue encourages Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Sudan Ramtane Lamamra “to use his good offices with the parties and the neighbouring States, complementing and coordinating regional peace efforts”. Lamamra assumed his role in November 2023 and has since been conducting diplomatic efforts, including through engagement with both warring parties and relevant stakeholders. 

Following yesterday’s open session on Sudan, Lamamra briefed Council members in closed consultations on his efforts towards resolving the crisis. (For more information, see our 6 March What’s in Blue story.)

It seems that on 5 March, the Sudanese government sent a letter to the Security Council, conveying its decision to facilitate the entry and delivery of humanitarian aid through several routes, including from Chad through the Tina border crossing; from South Sudan through the Renk border crossing; and through humanitarian flights accessing airports in the cities of Al Fasher, Kadugli, and Al Obeid. The draft resolution in blue includes language welcoming the Sudanese government’s announcement as a positive step.

The penholder made some additions and amendments to the preambular section of the draft resolution to accommodate comments from some Council members. Among other things, the draft resolution in blue, in its preambular paragraphs:

• expresses grave concern over the spreading violence and the deteriorating humanitarian situation, including crisis levels or worse of acute food insecurity, particularly in Darfur;
• takes note of the need for unhindered cross-border and cross-line humanitarian assistance into Darfur and encourages the parties to the conflict to continue working in close partnership with OCHA and international NGOs to ensure the delivery of life-saving humanitarian assistance;
• expresses concern at ongoing reports of violations of international humanitarian law and violations and abuses of human rights law, including cases of sexual violence in conflict;
• urges continuation and strengthened coordination of regional and international efforts to facilitate an end to the conflict and to restore a lasting inclusive civilian-led democratic transition; and
• welcomes the appointment of an AU High-Level Panel for Sudan and the AU’s commitment to working with the people of Sudan to end the fighting and to put in place a process towards achieving a lasting and inclusive peace, democracy, and justice in Sudan.

Tags: Insights on Africa, Sudan

View original: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/03/sudan-vote-on-a-draft-resolution.php

END