Article: https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00094591.html
Recent evidence suggesting the mass killings and torture of civilians fleeing North Darfur have led to condemnation of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan. The RSF is currently embroiled in a civil war with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), with the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, and the United States attempting to solve the issues diplomatically. However, despite the UAE’s position in this initiative, evidence has also arisen regarding supposed support for the RSF in the form of weapon supplies. The four countries have successfully failed to come to an agreement on proposals and are showing incompetence with engaging the two armies in Sudan who are tearing each other, and their civilian populations, apart. With the civil war raging for more than two years, now, it’s increasingly imperative that the two sides come to an agreement, or even more civilians are guaranteed to stand in the crossfire.
Although it may not seem like an issue for the vastness of Africa, the Sudanese civil war is a compilation of regional destabilisation which began in Chad and has spread to Yemen and Libya. The fierce fighting highlights warlord-type infighting between previous allies and continues to demonstrate the unwillingness of military leaders to give up power to more democratic means. The RSF’s choice to discernedly harm civilians is puzzling, too, as such publicity almost always leads to decreased support and a more unified response against the attacker. Is the RSF’s goal to conquer the rest of Sudan, or to place itself at a better seat to start peaceful negotiations?
The United States has already responded to the RSF’s brutality with sanctions against its leaders and many of those who fund them. Given the other states’ ignorance of the UAE’s funding, it’s unlikely that they will discontinue it, so they are likely to continue just as they have. Egypt and the Saudis are a much more unknowable outcome. Egypt has a vested interest in keeping the Nile river flowing and is therefore likely to support whichever side favors Egypt the most. The current Sudanese government has been apt to align themselves fairly well with the Egyptians, but if that changes who is to say they won’t intervene in the conflict? With the Arabian peninsula incredibly close and only separated by the Red Sea, and with Mecca so close to Sudan, it is also plausible that the Saudis may intervene more directly, but more likely than not this would be informal agreements and under-the-table negotiations or aid packages.
These issues in Sudan are directly connected to intra and inter-state instability and counter-terrorism. The United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE have a vested interest in keeping Sudan stable and free of terrorists. If the RSF continues to use its military power to forcefully remove civilians from this mortal plane, then they very well could expect intervention to prevent such attacks from occurring again.
