The Ongoing War: Will It Be Sudan’s Last Internal Conflict?
Abdullah Rizq Abu Simaza
The question of whether the current war—described by some of its participants as futile—will be Sudan’s last internal conflict implicitly acknowledges ongoing international efforts to end it. It also raises the issue of whether there will be guarantees to prevent the war from reigniting once it stops.
Ensuring that this war is Sudan’s final conflict is not just a possibility or a mere wish; it is an ethical and humanitarian imperative that everyone must uphold. This requires addressing the root causes of these wars to eradicate them, for the sake of a Sudan that is tolerant, reconciled with itself, and worthy of its people. Unfortunately, Sudan’s political movement has failed to achieve this goal, despite repeated theoretical affirmations that the issue of war—regardless of its location, whether in the south, Darfur, or any other region—is fundamentally Sudan’s own problem. However, in practice, those in power have pursued fragmented solutions to specific wars, failing to address their root causes. The latest war, which erupted on April 15, 2023, is merely another episode in a 70-year-long cycle of bloodshed that has plagued Sudan.
Thus, after the end of this senseless conflict, Sudanese citizens face an exceptional task—not only to restore the democratic transition but also to rebuild Sudan itself. This is not only because of the destruction caused by the war but also because of the pressing questions, problems, and challenges it has raised. The task ahead surpasses the traditional political transitions Sudan has witnessed following the fall of past regimes: after Abboud in 1964, Nimeiri in 1985, and Bashir in 2019, and perhaps even after the British departure in 1954. The challenge now is a historical transition—from a Sudan consumed by internal conflicts to a Sudan at peace with itself.
The national consensus of December 19, 1955, whose anniversary is now being observed, may not serve as an ideal model for the post-war Sudan. The so-called national agreement on independence within Parliament, nearly seven decades ago, concealed the true political bargains made behind the scenes. As history has shown, it failed to establish a solid and lasting national consensus capable of supporting Sudan’s long-anticipated development.
Internal wars within a political entity are often seen as an extension of politics, a sign of institutional aging and deteriorating social and political structures. However, Sudan’s experience is unique—its wars have been intertwined with its very birth as a nation. This raises the troubling question: Has Sudan aged before its time? Perhaps the Sudanese nationalists who inherited this political entity—handed down like a "fragile Chinese porcelain dish" from Turkish and British colonial rule—should have scrutinized its viability for survival.
The New Sudan thesis, the most recent political formula proposed to end the country’s cycle of wars, implicitly assumes Sudan’s premature decline. This vision aligns strategically and theoretically with slogans such as "Saving the Nation," "National Salvation," and "Liberating Sudan." However, following the death of Dr. John Garang de Mabior, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) reduced its national aspirations to an independent South Sudan, abandoning the broader vision of a "New Sudan." Likewise, the Darfurian movements, which took up arms against Bashir’s regime in 2003, drawing inspiration from Garang’s SPLM, ultimately settled for what they could secure through successive rounds of negotiations—rather than pursuing Sudan’s full liberation, which was once synonymous with Darfur’s own. As a result, the mission of freeing Sudan from the constraints that perpetuate its cycles of war and destruction remains unfulfilled.
The most urgent priority today is not just stopping the current war, but preventing future conflicts and preserving what remains of Sudan. This is especially crucial at a time when separatist movements, fueled by war, hate speech, racism, and ethnic and regional polarization, are gaining momentum.
