Nairobi, Kenya (Horn Observer) – A significant and decisive moment unfolded late Saturday when Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and an assortment of political and armed factions inked a charter to form what they boldly call a “government of peace and unity.” This pivot, rather than stitching the nation’s frayed seams, seems to only deepen the schism in a country that has been torn asunder by nearly two years of intense civil strife.
Imagine a room shrouded in secrecy, hushed voices marking the occasion in Nairobi, Kenya—a venue chosen for reasons known only to its hosts. This clandestine ceremony drew the ire of Sudan’s Foreign Ministry, a resentment that echoed with disapproval back home in Khartoum. A place where power dynamics often shift like the desert sands, Sudan is no stranger to power plays and shadow games.
Among the signatories was Abdelaziz al-Hilu, a name too familiar to observers of Sudan’s tangled history. His demands for secularism ring through South Kordofan, where his forces wield influence like a well-worn scepter. However, this attempt at a new government raises not just eyebrows but concerns at the United Nations, an entity weary of recognizing yet another faction in a landscape of fragmented loyalties. Is this a quest for unity, or merely another faction vying for control?
The RSF’s expanding footprint across western Darfur and Kordofan clashes headlong with the Sudanese army’s attempts to hold central Sudan. Official condemnations from the army underscore a simple truth: formations outside the accepted corridors of power seem illegitimate, a thorn in the side of established order.
Idris, a former official with a past as tangled as the conflict itself, hinted at an impending announcement from within Sudan. “Soon,” he seemed to promise—a word stretched thin by the weight of uncertain days. The charter boldly stipulates Sudan’s identity as a “secular, democratic, non-centralized state” with aspirations for a singular, national army. Yet, paradoxically, it permits armed groups to retain their forces, a contradiction that almost invites chaos rather than instituting order.
But this newly minted agreement professes a rather noble, albeit ambitious aim: to unify and end a brutal, wearying war—objectives the army-backed government in Port Sudan has ostensibly failed to realize.
So, how has the world reacted? RSF leader General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, whose name is whispered alongside accusations of genocide and abuse, stands sanctioned by the United States. These shadows follow him persistently since he co-handed power with military and civilian figures post-Omar al-Bashir’s 2019 ousting. Yet, as history often proves cyclical, the RSF and army themselves orchestrated a joint coup in 2021, later turning on one another in a brutal confrontation centered on army integration during Sudan’s faltering democratic transition.
The conflict casts a grim shadow over Sudan, precipitating a humanitarian crisis rapidly approaching unprecedented depths. It’s a situation where famine hangs like a sword over several paradoxically resource-rich regions, its specter haunting nearly half the nation’s inhabitants with hunger so severe, it cannot be ignored.
Talks and signings in Kenya have fueled diplomatic friction, sparking accusations against actors like the United Arab Emirates, alleged backers of the RSF’s logistical needs. Allegations, however, are denied with the eloquence of a diplomat who knows when to parry and when to keep quiet. Meanwhile, Port Sudan remains defiant, enacting constitutional amendments that stretch the military’s reach further than ever before, even as General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan teases a “war cabinet” in the offing.
As it stands, Sudan’s future brims with uncertainty. The landscape is riddled with entrenched factions, each digging deeper, making the dream of a unified, peaceful resolution feel akin to chasing mirages across the sand—a captivating vision, yet dishearteningly out of reach.
Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International–Monitoring
