Obstacles to forming a united front against Sudan's war

Consensus that the regular army should be purged of politics exists; progress depends on agreement over what to do about the Rapid Support Forces

AFP

Fighters traveling in a military convoy accompanying the governor of Darfur state on August 30, 2023.

Obstacles to forming a united front against Sudan's war

Amgad Fareid Eltayeb

last update on 14 Oct 2023

The war in Sudan has made the need for unity among the country’s civil groups all the more clear.

Consensus is vital if there is ever to be effective political opposition to the fighting, and it will not be easy to achieve in a country torn apart by factionalisation and violence.

Politicians have debated how to unite more urgently since fighting broke out in April. But such discussions go back to the coup in October 2021, which brought back military rule and ended the transitional government, which was charged with restoring democracy.

After working together during the coup, the regular Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces militia were on course for conflict.

Soldiers from the Rapid Support Forces unit during an army-backed march, in the Mayo area, south of Khartoum, on June 29, 2019.

The coup came about after the country’s fragmented civil political groups could not work together and create a stable framework for government, with the Transitional Council riven with factions. The subsequent descent into civil war shows clearly what was at stake then, and unity is needed now to end the violence.

But Sudan’s political parties have a history of being unable to work together. Disagreements hobbled the work of the transitional government. What was once an influential political group – the Forces for Freedom and Change – descended into squabbles over government posts. It was riven with arguments over how to share control over parts of the government with different ideological groups — each determined to pursue their various agendas.

Demonstrations and an impasse

Rallies and demonstrations were held – similar to those that stoked wider widespread protests and the downfall of the Omar al-Bashir regime in 2019 – but this time, they were merely being used to influence government appointments or provincial politics.

This obstructed the actual government business, opening the way for the coup. The political impasse led to citizens appealing to the regular army and the RSF for assistance in getting things done and gave both a thirst for power.

After the war broke out, the lack of unity among civil groups persisted. It gave the international community cover for its own ineffective response to the violence.

While that was no more than an excuse, with civil groups uninvolved in talks about ending the fighting, long-term peace and stability in the country depend on functioning politics.

Faltering unity and false accusations

There have been attempts at unifying the country’s political groups as the war rages on, but they have not made much difference so far.

After the war broke out, the lack of unity among civil groups persisted. It gave the international community cover for its own ineffective response to the violence.

The Forces for Freedom and Change formed the Civil Front to Stop the War and Restore Democracy not long after it broke out, in April. Many groups and prominent national figures signed its founding statement.

Known as the Front, it was less about proper unity and more about the same old political manoeuvring of the past. Some people who signed up were left out of the announcement of the group's founding.

Then, in May, the group issued a statement with fabricated allegations of rape against the regular army in a move to equate it with the RSF militia. The Front withdrew the statement and apologized days later, but not before it looked biased. It started losing support, with groups pulling out.

Much talking, little unity

There have been various attempts to establish civil unity since, but they have multiplied to the point that these moves themselves require a form of unification. Coordination meetings between the initiatives have taken up most of their time.

They have come from international organisations – including the African Union and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development, alongside some national groups. Senior national figures – including former Prime Minister Dr. Abdalla Hamdok and former Sudanese Ambassador to Washington Ambassador Nureldin Satti – have done the same.

More attempts came from the Humanitarian Dialogue Centre, with the support of the European Union.

There have been various attempts to establish civil unity since, but they have multiplied to the point that these moves themselves require a form of unification.

The wider international community has both supported and criticised these initiatives. There has been less attention from it on the fundamental importance of making progress among political groups to help end the civil war.

Prospects for a consensus are there. There is already widespread agreement about what needs to be done in terms of the Regular Army: it should be depoliticised.

Comprehensive reform is required to end its meddling in political matters and to stop its involvement in economic activity. A purge of its ranks is required, especially of the remnants of al-Bashir's deposed Islamist regime.

Stark divisions

But there is also one major area of disagreement across Sudan's political spectrum: What to do about the RSF. Resolving it could lead to a breakthrough.

Divisions among the political groups over the RSF are stark. Some are determined to preserve the RSF, despite the atrocities it is accused of and its similarities with the Muslim Brotherhood, which backed al-Bashir before the popular uprising deposed him.

Divisions among the political groups over the RSF are stark. Some are determined to preserve the RSF, despite the atrocities it is accused of and its similarities with the Muslim Brotherhood, which backed al-Bashir before the popular uprising deposed him.

That makes it unlikely that the Sudanese people will accept that as outcome. Neither is it likely that an ambiguous outcome for the group will be accepted.

The RSF missed a chance to atone for its previous support for al-Bashir when he was deposed. It is less likely to do so now after the further wave of violence in the civil war. That has brought its acts of murder, rape and looting to the wider nation of Sudan from Darfur, where these crimes were committed for years beforehand.

Toppled

Neither did the regular army do much to mend its ways. Instead, both sides of the current civil war conspired against civilian rule before toppling it together and then fighting each other.

The RSF's main motivation is to preserve power for itself, and its record shows it has behaved like a fascist organisation. Anyone who mentions the militia's violations is accused of aiming to prolong the war, or of bias toward the regular army.

Facing up to the realities of its behaviour among civil groups and reaching agreement on how to deal with the RSF will be vital to progress toward establishing a just, democratic state and ensuring stability in Sudan.

Justice cannot be served through injustice.

+ / -