Sudan: UN Security Council Private Meeting 29 Apr

Report from United Nations

Security Council Report (SCR)

What’s In Blue

Dated Sunday, 28 April 2024 - here is a full copy:

Sudan: Private Meeting

Tomorrow morning (29 April), the Security Council will convene for a private meeting to discuss the security and humanitarian situations in Sudan. Malta, April’s Council president, scheduled the meeting following bilateral consultations with some Council members and the parties concerned. Assistant Secretary-General for Africa in the Departments of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and Peace Operations (DPPA-DPO) Martha Ama Akyaa Pobee and Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Joyce Msuya are expected to brief. Sudan is expected to participate under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure.

Tomorrow’s meeting comes against the backdrop of a severe escalation of violence across several parts of Sudan, particularly in the city of El-Fasher, the capital city of North Darfur state. One year into the conflict that erupted on 15 April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, Sudan’s military leader, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (also known as Hemeti), the fighting continues to have devastating consequences for civilians. As at 14 April, more than 15,500 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 that collects conflict-related data.

In 2023, the RSF made significant advances, taking control of parts of Darfur, Khartoum, and Kordofan. El-Fasher remains the only capital city in the Darfur region outside the RSF’s control. The final report of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1591 Sudan Sanctions Committee, dated 15 January, noted that amidst initial violence in April 2023 local authorities in El-Fasher had brokered a ceasefire agreement, dividing the city between the SAF, the RSF, and the armed movements in Darfur, which are signatories to the Juba Peace Agreement. This arrangement allowed the SAF and the RSF to maintain positions on the west and east sides of the city, respectively, with a central area designated as a buffer zone under the control of the joint force of the armed movements. Recently, the joint force reportedly renounced its neutrality in the conflict and pledged support to the SAF, apparently citing the RSF’s provocations, including attacks on its positions and threats to block humanitarian aid, as the reasons for its decision.

In recent days, several UN officials have raised the alarm about the potential outbreak of full-scale fighting in El-Fasher and the resulting humanitarian consequences. In a 13 April statement, Secretary-General António Guterres expressed concern about escalating tensions between armed actors in El-Fasher, noting that an attack on the city “would be devastating for civilians…and could lead to an expansion of the conflict along intercommunal lines across the five Darfur states”. He reiterated his call for an immediate ceasefire and a durable cessation of hostilities. He also called on the warring parties to abide by their obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law to protect civilians and facilitate full and unrestricted humanitarian access to all areas in need.

On 19 April, Council members met to discuss the situation in Sudan, at the request of the UK, the penholder on Sudan. In her remarks, Msuya said that on 13 April, following weeks of rising tensions and airstrikes, RSF-affiliated militias attacked and burned villages west of El-Fasher. Since then, she added, there have been continuing reports of clashes in the eastern and northern parts of the city. She further noted that the continuing violence poses an extreme and immediate danger to the 800,000 civilians residing in the city and risks triggering further violence in other parts of Darfur—where more than nine million people are in dire need of humanitarian assistance. At the same meeting, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo informed the members that in the north of El-Fasher, clashes had erupted between the RSF and SAF-aligned members of the joint force in the district of Mellit. She added that “fighting in El-Fasher could unleash bloody intercommunal strife throughout Darfur…[and] would also further impede the delivery of humanitarian assistance in an area already on the brink of famine”. (For background and more information, see our 19 April What’s in Blue story.)

At tomorrow’s meeting, Msuya is expected to provide an update on the humanitarian situation in the region in light of the evolving security developments. A 26 April OCHA press release said that the security situation has effectively cut off humanitarian access to El-Fasher—which serves as an important hub for reaching other parts of Darfur, including for aid shipments through the Tine border crossing from Chad and from Port Sudan. It added that more than a dozen trucks with lifesaving supplies for 122,000 people remain stranded in Ad Dabbah in the Northern state, due to persisting insecurity and lack of guarantees for safe passage.

On 27 April, Council members issued a press statement, co-authored by the UK and members of “A3 plus one” grouping (Algeria, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Guyana). The statement expressed concern about the escalating tensions and military operations around El-Fasher. Members called on the SAF and RSF to end the build-up of military forces, take steps to de-escalate the situation and comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law. They reiterated their call for an immediate cessation of hostilities, leading to a sustainable ceasefire. In addition, they urged all member states to “refrain from external interference which seeks to foment conflict and instability and instead to support efforts for a durable peace” and reminded the Sudanese warring parties and all member states to comply with the arms embargo obligations, imposed by resolution 1556 of 30 July 2004 and most recently renewed by resolution 2676 of 8 March 2023. Several members are expected to reiterate these points at tomorrow’s meeting.

Another key issue that is likely to feature in tomorrow’s discussion is the flow of arms into Sudan in violation of the arms embargo. The 15 January final report of the Panel of Experts indicated that since the onset of the conflict, the RSF had been able to secure new supply lines to and through Darfur for weapons, vehicles, and logistics, including through eastern Chad, Libya and South Sudan. The report noted that the accusations levelled by the SAF that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Chad had provided military support to the RSF through Amdjarass were found credible. Furthermore, the report found that, from July 2023 onwards, “the RSF deployed several types of heavy and/or sophisticated weapons including Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs), howitzers, multiple-rocket launchers and anti-aircraft weapons such as MANPADS [Man-Portable Air Defence Systems]”, which had a massive impact on the balance of forces, both in Darfur and other regions of Sudan—in violation of the arms embargo.

Today (28 April), Sudan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Al-Harith Idriss al-Harith Mohamed, apparently sent a letter to the Council claiming that the UAE’s support to the RSF represents a “flagrant violation” of the UN Charter and the Sudan sanctions regime. The letter requested the Council to convene an emergency meeting to discuss the “UAE’s aggression against Sudan…[and] hold it responsible for the crimes committed against the Sudanese people”. The UAE has denied these allegations on several occasions, most recently in a 21 April letter addressed to the Council, which said that “[a]ll allegations of the United Arab Emirates’ involvement in any form of aggression or destabilization in Sudan, or its provision of any military, logistical, financial or political support to any faction in Sudan, are spurious, unfounded, and lack any credible evidence to support them”.

Tags: Insights on Africa, Sudan, Sudan (Darfur)

About What's In Blue

When the Security Council approaches the final stage of negotiating a draft resolution, the text is printed in blue. What's In Blue is a series of insights on evolving Security Council actions designed to help interested UN readers keep up with what might soon be "in blue".

View original: 

https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/04/sudan-private-meeting.php

_________________________________________________________________________________

SUDAN WATCH UPDATE on Mon 29 Apr 2024 22:39 GMT: The above report, originally entitled Sudan: Private Meeting has been retitled and updated by What's In Blue as follows:

Sudan: Closed Consultations*

*Post-script (29 April, 9:50 am EST): After the story’s publication, the format of the meeting was changed from private meeting to closed consultations. An earlier version of the story indicated that Sudan will participate in the meeting under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. After the changing of the meeting’s format this was no longer possible, as closed consultations do not allow participation of non-Council member states. The story was amended to reflect these changes.

View original: 

https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/04/sudan-private-meeting.php

END 

Former Sudan PM Hamdok meets Macron in Paris

REGARDING the absence of the Sudanese government from the Paris conference, President Macron stated during a meeting with Sudanese civil society representatives that the government had lost its legitimacy due to the 2021 coup against civilians. 

In the previous week, Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed “its utmost astonishment and condemnation” of the conference, convened by France, Norway, the United Kingdom, the USA, and the European Union, denouncing “that such a conference is convened on a matter concerning Sudan without consultation or coordination with its government and without its participation…” Read more.

From Radio Dabanga English - www.dabangasudan.org
Dated Wednesday, 17 April 2024 PARIS / OTTAWA - here is a copy in full:

Former Sudan PM Hamdok meets Macron in Paris

Former Prime Minister of Sudan, Abdallah Hamdok (File photo: SUNA)

Former Prime Minister of Sudan and current chair of the Civil Democratic Forces (Tagaddum), Abdalla Hamdok, engaged in discussions on the war in Sudan with French President Emmanuel Macron during a closed session in Paris yesterday.

Following his visit to the French capital, Hamdok expressed gratitude to President Macron for France’s unwavering support of the Sudanese people’s aspirations and their stance in backing Sudan’s December revolution and the transitional civilian government. 

He commended the success of the Paris conference, which drew global attention to Sudan’s plight, raising €2 billion in pledged support from France, Germany, and the European Union for humanitarian aid.

Underscoring the significance of building on the achievements of the Paris conference, the Tagaddum head urged continued international efforts towards silencing the guns of war.

President Macron, in turn, welcomed Hamdok’s participation in the conference activities and reaffirmed France’s commitment to supporting Sudanese efforts for peace, freedom, and justice.

The former Sudanese leader also held discussions with Canadian Minister of International Development Ahmed Hussen and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on the sidelines of the humanitarian conference in Paris.

Earlier this week, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly announced sanctions against two individuals and four entities affiliated with the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces for undermining peace, security, and stability in Sudan.

Regarding the absence of the Sudanese government from the Paris conference, President Macron stated during a meeting with Sudanese civil society representatives that the government had lost its legitimacy due to the 2021 coup against civilians.

Last week, Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed “its utmost astonishment and condemnation” of the conference, convened by France, Norway, the United Kingdom, the USA, and the European Union, denouncing “that such a conference is convened on a matter concerning Sudan without consultation or coordination with its government and without its participation…”

Hamdok reiterated that a military solution to the conflict was untenable and advocated for a negotiated peace process driven by Sudanese initiatives. 

He called for unity among Sudanese factions to streamline peace efforts and avoid fragmentation.

View original: https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/former-sudan-pm-hamdok-meets-macron-in-paris

END

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