The London Conference on Sudan 15th April 2025

Presidential Palace Khartoum 2012 by the author

Sudan - can the UK's "progressive realism" help?

Sir Nick Kay

Former Ambassador

April 11, 2025

The world’s worst humanitarian crisis and one of its most dangerous, complex, bloody wars gets a moment in the spotlight in London on 15 April. Foreign ministers and senior officials from international organisations will meet at Lancaster House to discuss Sudan. After two years of conflict, the UK is taking a diplomatic initiative that many believe long overdue given its historical ties and current responsibility at the United Nations Security Council to hold the pen on Sudan resolutions.

But is the conference likely to lead to anything positive for the Sudanese people? 

Expectations are understandably low. The de facto Sudanese authorities led by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have criticised the UK for not inviting them to the conference. They object strongly to the UAE being invited because they consider it an ally of the rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and therefore a party to the conflict. On the ground both the RSF and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have pledged to continue the war until they achieve complete victory. No impartial observer thinks that possible. As the war drags on, Sudan suffers from political polarisation, fragmentation and continued external meddling.

It's too easy to look the other way and too easy to think this is just a messy, protracted struggle that will continue inconclusively. But the immediate future may not be a continuation of the last two years. 

Red warning lights are flashing. Sudan’s neighbour South Sudan is teetering on the brink of civil war and the Sudanese conflict is playing its part in destabilising South Sudan and vice versa. Other neighbouring countries are also vulnerable to fall-out from Sudan: Chad in particular. With any expansion of war in the region, the humanitarian consequences and political risks of spiralling conflict magnify. Within Sudan itself the increased presence of Islamist extremists, armed militia and potentially international terror groups is another flashing light. Geopolitical tensions - already existing - may escalate. The Sudan Armed Forces have been ostracised by western powers and have entered agreements with Russia and Iran in their search for arms. Both countries see establishing a presence on Sudan’s Red Sea coast as a prize. But such a move would be highly provocative for others, including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Over the last two years efforts to broker ceasefires have failed, only limited progress has been made on improving humanitarian access and efforts to bring about a comprehensive political settlement between the various actors - the two military forces, political parties, armed movements and civil society actors - have all led to nought. Many have tried, including the UN, AU, IGAD, the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey but none has succeeded. These “track 1” efforts have been complemented by multiple “track 2” initiatives led by NGOs and peace foundations. But so far the willingness to give as well as take in any negotiation is sorely missing.

Proposals

Absent political will by the protagonists and their external backers, what can be achieved in London? 

Limited but important steps can be agreed in three areas: the humanitarian response, political process and international cooperation. 

On the humanitarian front, the key challenges remain both funding and access. In April 2024 at a conference in Paris, donors made generous pledges totalling USD $2 billion. Much of that has yet to be disbursed. London is not a pledging conference, but should be the opportunity for partners to live up to their past commitments and renew their determination to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance for the 11 million Sudanese forced to flee their homes— food, shelter, medicines and healthcare at a minimum. The challenges for humanitarians are enormous: Sudan’s domestic political and ethnic complexity compounded by the regional tensions with and between Sudan’s neighbours necessitate an enhanced international aid effort coordinated by a senior UN figure. 

A political process remains the missing element and in London agreement may be possible on how to deal with the most immediate challenge as well as on the essential elements for a future process. Since the SAF now control the capital Khartoum again, it is likely they will press ahead with their own political roadmap and appoint a civilian government subordinate to the military to take forward a transition towards eventual restoration of democracy. 

How should the international community respond to this - reject, ignore, embrace, or shape it? Given the risk of Sudan being partitioned into two warring regions - Darfur and the South controlled by the RSF and the North, East and centre being controlled by the SAF - no SAF-imposed roadmap is going to be the final word. Not only will it not include the RSF and its supporters, but also many of the political actors who supported the 2019 revolution, which overthrew General Bashir’s military rule, will have nothing to do with the SAF roadmap. So the challenge for the international community is to try to work within the new political reality on a temporary and tentative basis. The aim should be to shape the SAF’s actions in order to move towards a credible inclusive political transition. The London conference could agree criteria by which such a political process will be judged. Key questions will be: how inclusive is the process and what genuine efforts are made to ensure inclusiveness of all Sudan; how are civil and political rights protected; how will security, justice and reconciliation be achieved; what are the criteria for selection of members of a transitional administration; what real authority will the administration have over economic and budgetary affairs; what are the provisions and realistic timetable for an all-inclusive Sudanese national dialogue? Above all, how firmly enshrined is the commitment to full democratic and civilian rule in Sudan, for which Sudanese men, women and youth struggled and died over the years? 

These are difficult questions that have defied easy answers since 2019. Helping Sudanese actors address them will require substantial and coordinated international action. 

The third way the London conference could contribute is by setting out agreed principles and a framework for the international community. The Sudan crisis is of such a complexity and international nature that it requires a creative and collaborative approach. The conference could propose that an international panel of mediators be appointed, led by the African Union but comprising additional senior figures from beyond Africa. Rank is important and ideally the panel would be at former head of state or government level and mandated by a UN Security Council resolution. The panel’s focus should be on advancing a comprehensive political settlement. Early consultation with the SAF, RSF and Sudanese civil and political actors about the terms of reference will be essential. The conference could agree who should take forward this consultation and a time frame.

Conclusion

Foreign Secretary David Lammy convened the conference after seeing at first hand the devastating impact of the war on Sudanese women and children on the Chad-Sudan border. Just because the Sudan war is complicated and far from our TV screens, we cannot in all conscience ignore it. This is a moment to put the Foreign Secretary’s doctrine of “progressive realism” into action.

 [These are the personal views of the author and do not represent the views of any organisation with which he is associated.]

CMI — Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation 

Diplomats without Borders 

View original: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sudan-can-uks-progressive-realism-help-sir-nick-kay-nc3be/

___________________________

Related 

Sudan Watch - 19 Nov 2010

British Ambassador in Khartoum Nicholas Kay is blogging the drama and scale of the change taking place in Sudan

The British government's Foreign & Commonwealth Office, commonly called the Foreign Office or the FCO, has started a blog about the work of the British Ambassador to Sudan. The blog is authored by Nicholas Kay CMG, Her Majesty's Ambassador to Sudan. Mr Kay (pictured below) arrived in Khartoum to take up his role as HM Ambassador to Sudan on 29 May 2010. Here is a copy of his first two blog posts followed by several related reports.

Full story: https://sudanwatch.blogspot.com/2010/11/british-ambassador-in-khartoum-nicholas.html

_____________

Sir Nicholas Kay KCMG
British Ambassador to the Republic of Sudan 2010 to 2012
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/nicholas-kay

_____________

End

South Sudan on brink of civil war, UN's Haysom warns

“The time for action is now because the alternative is too terrible to contemplate” -Nicholas Haysom, UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative and Head of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS)

Read more in report from UN News

By Vibhu Mishra

Dated Monday, 24 March 2025 - full copy:

South Sudan on the brink of civil war, top UN official warns

© WFP/Peter Louis Displaced people in Renk County, Upper Nile State, South Sudan. (file)

South Sudan is teetering on the brink of a return to full-scale civil war as violence escalates and political tensions deepen, the head of the UN Mission in the country (UNMISS) warned on Monday.

Briefing journalists at UN Headquarters in New York via videolink from Juba, Nicholas Haysom described indiscriminate attacks on civilians, mass displacement and rising ethnic tensions.

He urged all parties to pull back from the brink and commit to peace before the country plunges into another devastating conflict.

“A conflict would erase all the hard-won gains made since the 2018 peace deal was signed. It would devastate not only South Sudan but the entire region, which simply cannot afford another war,” he warned.

Fragile peace at risk

South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in 2011, but the world’s youngest nation has been plagued by conflict and instability ever since.

A civil war erupted in 2013 between forces loyal to President Salva Kiir and those aligned with his former deputy, Riek Machar. The war – marked by ethnic violence, mass atrocities and widespread humanitarian crisis – lasted until a fragile peace deal was signed in 2018.

Though the 2018 Revitalized Peace Agreement brought a degree of stability, delays in its implementation and continued political rivalries have kept tensions simmering.

Mounting violence

The latest wave of violence erupted on 4 March when the so-called White Army – a youth militia – overran South Sudanese army barracks in Nasir, Upper Nile province.

In response, Government forces launched retaliatory aerial bombardments on civilian areas, using barrel bombs that allegedly contained highly flammable accelerants.

“These indiscriminate attacks on civilians are causing significant casualties and horrific injuries, especially burns, including to women and children,” Mr. Haysom said, adding that at least 63,000 people have fled the area.

Reports indicate that both the White Army and national forces are mobilising for further confrontations, with allegations of child recruitment into armed groups.

The deployment of foreign forces at the request of the Government has further heightened tensions, evoking painful memories of the country’s previous civil wars.

Rising ethnic tensions

Political tensions are also escalating, Mr. Haysom continued.

Senior officials affiliated with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement in Opposition (SPLM-IO) – the main rival militia – have been removed, replaced, detained, or forced into hiding.

There is also an increasing use of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech, which is fuelling ethnic divisions and fear, making reconciliation even more difficult.

“Given this grim situation, we are left with no other conclusion, but to assess that South Sudan is teetering on the edge of a relapse into civil war,” the senior UN official warned.

Diplomatic efforts stalled

Mr. Haysom further reported that UNMISS has engaged in intensive diplomatic efforts alongside regional and international partners, including the African Union (AU), the regional development bloc, IGAD, and the Reconstituted Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission.

However, a scheduled high-level visit by IGAD foreign ministers to Juba, aimed at mediating between the parties, was abruptly postponed by the South Sudanese government without explanation.

“This is a disappointing development at a time when diplomatic outreach is more important than ever,” he said.

Recommit to peace

Mr. Haysom urged South Sudan’s leaders to immediately recommit to the 2018 peace deal, respect the ceasefire, release detained officials and resolve disputes through dialogue rather than military confrontation.

He also called for President Kiir and First Vice President Machar to meet and publicly reaffirm their joint commitment to peace.

“The time for action is now because the alternative is too terrible to contemplate.”

WATCH VIDEO: Nicholas Haysom, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for South Sudan speaks to the press via videolink.

View original: Here

End

Sudan: Furious row at UN as Russia blocks resolution to protect civilians. SAF chief praises Russia UN veto

IN a move strongly condemned by the UK and US, Russia has vetoed a draft UK-backed UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Sudan. See video of voting and meeting on a draft resolution to protect civilians in Sudan: 14 voted in favour, 1 voted against (Russia), 0 abstentions. Sudan's army chief Gen. Burhan said the army would not negotiate or agree to a ceasefire without a "full retreat" by the RSF. More in three reports below.

___________________________

From BBC News online
By Damian Zane & Will Ross
Dated Mon 18 Nov 2024; Updated Tue 19 Nov 2024 - full copy:

Furious row at UN as Russia blocks Sudan ceasefire move

IMAGE SOURCE, REUTERS. 

Image caption, More than 11 million people have fled the fighting

In a move strongly condemned by the UK and US, Russia has vetoed a draft UK-backed UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Sudan.

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy called the veto a "disgrace". But Russia accused the UK of meddling in Sudanese affairs without involving Sudan itself.

Sudan's 19-month civil war is believed to have led to the deaths of tens of thousands of people. More than 11 million have been forced from their homes.

Aid workers say the conflict has created the world's worst humanitarian crisis, with many thousands at risk of famine.

Sudanese activists have been highly critical of the UN for being slow to respond to the conflict.

It began in April last year after the army and a powerful paramilitary group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), began a vicious struggle for power.

The military is in control of the government.

Monday's draft resolution, proposed by the UK and Sierra Leone, called on both sides to immediately halt hostilities and start talks aimed at agreeing a national ceasefire.

It also called on the army and RSF to respect previous agreements to protect civilians, but specifically mentioned RSF attacks in the western region of Darfur and elsewhere in the country.

Sudan's representative at the UN said that clauses that it wanted in the text were not included.

Aside from Russia, all the other 14 Security Council member states voted in favour of the draft, but the veto meant the resolution did not pass.

"This Russian veto is a disgrace and it shows to the world yet again Russia’s true colours," Lammy told the meeting in New York.

"I ask the Russian representative in all conscience sitting there on his phone. How many more Sudanese have to be killed? How many more women have to be raped? How many more children have to go without food before Russia will act?"

US ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield was equally outspoken, accusing Russia of obstructing moves "to address the catastrophic situation in Sudan, and playing both sides – both sides of the conflict to advance its own political objectives, at the expense of Sudanese lives".

Russia was once seen as backing the RSF in the conflict, but appears to have switched sides.

Russia's representative at the UN, Dmitry Polyanskiy, said that Sudanese sovereignty was being ignored, adding that the UK-backed resolution was "an attempt to give themselves an opportunity to meddle" in what was happening in Sudan.

"Shame on you, the UK!", he posted on X later, external. "For trying to push through a resolution that pours gasoline into [the] Sudan crisis leaving muddy waters for Western countries, that they love so much in former colonies, to push for their agenda."

Sudan analyst Alex de Waal described this as an "absolutely extraordinary argument to make in the face of the humanitarian catastrophe - the total state collapse of Sudan and the fact that the government is only able to govern a very small corner of the country".

In an interview with the BBC World Service's Newsday programme he added that it was a "very bad day for Africa" as previously the continent's diplomats through the Africa Union (AU) had managed to bridge the divides in the Security Council between Russia, the US and China when it came to Sudan.

Speaking after the Security Council's discussions had finished, Sudan’s ambassador to the UN, Al-Harith Idriss al-Harith Mohamed, said that certain "prerequisites" were not in the draft.

He said that Sudan had wanted a clause condemning the United Arab Emirate's backing of the RSF, something which the UAE has consistently denied.

He also wanted the RSF to be classified as "terrorists... because it wages a war of extermination against civilians".

Both the army and the RSF have been accused of human rights violations that could amount to war crimes.

Additional reporting by the BBC's Nada Tawfik in New York

More about the Sudan conflict from the BBC:

Rape me, not my daughter' - women tell BBC of sexual violence in Sudan
WATCH: Inside a hospital on the front line of Sudan’s hunger crisis
A simple guide to the Sudan war

WATCH: 'They ransacked my home and left my town in ruins'
Women raped in war-hit Sudan die by suicide, activists say
'Our future is over': Forced to flee by a year of war
Starvation in war-hit Sudan 'almost everywhere' - WHO
Hundreds die from cholera as war rages in Sudan

View original: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c33elmnzj0po

_________________________________

Related reports

Sudan Watch - Mon 18 Nov 2024

Sudan: Vote on a Draft Resolution to Protect Civilians

WATCH: Full meeting. 14 voted in favour, 1 against (Russia), 0 abstentions

https://sudanwatch.blogspot.com/2024/11/sudan-vote-on-draft-resolution-to.html

_______

AFP - Mon 18 Nov 2024

Sudan army chief rejects 'interference' after Russia UN veto

On Tuesday, Burhan said the army would not negotiate or agree to a ceasefire without a "full retreat" by the RSF. "The end of this war lies in the complete elimination of the rebels," he said, adding that only then could civilian life resume, aid flow to all Sudanese and only and political matters be addressed. ... Last month, UN experts accused both sides of using "starvation tactics" against 26 million civilians, as aid groups warned of a "historic" hunger crisis forcing families to eat leaves and insects.

https://www.jacarandafm.com/news/news/sudan-army-chief-rejects-interference-russia-un-veto/

End