Access to Switzerland: Has Washington Cleared the Mines on Sudans Path to Peace?
Report — Moatinoon
One of the most famous quotes from the renowned English General and Commander of the Battle of El Alamein in World War II, Bernard Montgomery, is: "If you want to win the war, you must first unite the home front." This, of course, applies to external wars and not civil or internal wars, and it certainly does not relate to the reality of Sudans internal wars in general, and particularly our ongoing war for more than a year.
Unlike external wars that a state or a group of states may fight against another, the multiplicity of decision-making centers within each of the warring internal parties is one of the most prominent features that distinguish civil wars. This is due to the nature of the war, especially when it extends over time and space. This makes it difficult to end the fighting and delays the decisive decision in favor of peace, as the conflicts scope widens and interests within each party become more entangled. This represents the most significant and dangerous mines that need to be cleared on the path to peace.
While this has clearly manifested itself on the ground with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), where its leaders admitted their inability to control their troops, allowing each commander to make decisions in his area—leading to widespread violations against civilians in areas under their control—it has also become evident within the Sudanese Armed Forces when tested in negotiations to ceasefire at various forums since the war broke out on April 15, 2023.
Initiatives with Unfulfilled Promises
Since the war erupted in Sudan, regional and global powers have sought to extinguish its flames before they spread, as the warning signs were already visible, and all attempts to avoid it at the time had failed.
Jeddah Forum: Both Saudi Arabia and the United States initiated the Jeddah Forum, which held its first sessions less than a month after the war broke out, on May 6, 2023. The forum held three rounds and reached an agreement signed by the warring parties on May 11 of the same year. However, the ceasefire intended to implement the agreement failed. The forum held three rounds, the last of which was on December 3, after which the facilitators suspended the negotiations due to non-compliance with the signed agreements.
IGAD Initiative: On April 26, 2023, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) launched an initiative to facilitate dialogue among all parties and find a lasting solution to the Sudanese crisis, but the initiative failed to bring the parties together.
African Union Initiative: At the end of May last year, the African Union announced a roadmap to resolve the conflict in Sudan, which included "an immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities, protection of civilians, completion of the transitional political process, and the formation of a democratic civilian government."
Ethiopian Initiative: In June 2023, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed expressed his readiness to visit Khartoum and mediate a ceasefire during a meeting with the Deputy Chairman of the Sudanese Sovereignty Council.
Arab League Initiative: The General Secretariat of the Arab League received a national initiative from Sudanese civilian figures to resolve the crisis. The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, also called in March 2024 for "an end to the bloodshed in Sudan," urging for a "swift agreement on a ceasefire."
Sudans Neighboring Countries Summit in Cairo: Egypt proposed an initiative to draft a joint vision for Sudans direct neighboring countries. The summit, held in July 2023, aimed to "ceasefire, open safe corridors, deliver aid, conduct comprehensive dialogue, and establish a mechanism to communicate with the warring factions."
The Army: Multiple Decision-Making Centers
The initiative launched by the United States to bring the warring parties together in Switzerland for ceasefire talks was quickly welcomed by the RSF leadership, which announced its commitment to attend. This placed the army, the other party in the negotiations, in a position where it had to contend with multiple decision-making centers before making its decision.
The invitation by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on July 23 included specific goals to be achieved in the Swiss talks: "ending violence nationwide, enabling humanitarian aid access to all in need, and developing a robust monitoring and verification mechanism to ensure the implementation of any agreement."
The statement clearly indicated that the talks were not intended to "address broader political issues" and called on the Sudanese Armed Forces and RSF to attend the talks and engage constructively, emphasizing the need to save lives, stop the fighting, and find a negotiated political solution to the conflict.
The invitation, whose main parties would include the United States and Saudi Arabia, with the monitoring of some relevant countries and organizations, was met with widespread internal approval and international and regional relief as pressure mounted on the parties after the humanitarian crisis worsened and the Sudanese people suffered from widespread displacement—"more than 10 million internally displaced persons and nearly 2 million refugees in neighboring countries."
Kamal Omar, the political secretary of the Popular Congress Party, confirms the existence of decision-making centers within the armed forces that influence the decision to stop the war. He told "moatinoon" that there are known political entities that do not want peace and have political agendas they want to achieve through the army by continuing the war.
He urged army leaders to go to Geneva for the sake of the nation and the people, calling for rational political assessments instead of fiery rhetoric. He added, "I believe going to Geneva will achieve the objectives of peace."
However, Adil al-Baz, editor-in-chief of Al-Ahdath newspaper, denies the existence of multiple decision-making centers within the army, attributing the matter to new developments that complicate the decision to enter new negotiations at a new forum. Al-Baz told "moatinoon" that the government now has partners fighting alongside it who are concerned with every decision made in the war. "I mean the armed movements that were neutral when the war broke out and the Jeddah negotiations began, so the army negotiated alone. But now they are present on the ground, and their voices must be heard. You cant tell them to fight with the army and then let the army negotiate alone. The army is not the only party involved in the negotiations this time and their outcomes."
Al-Baz added that there are others in the armys ranks—diverse groups that supported the army in the battle—and their voices must be heard. He pointed out that there is public opinion within the army that must be taken into account, noting that opinion polls within the army now indicate opposition to negotiations. "This is where the complication lies in making a decision about the negotiations."
The Darfurian armed movements fighting alongside the army issued a statement saying, "Any initiative aimed at ending the war or ceasing fire, which directly or indirectly seeks to impose the notion that there are only two parties in this war, and attempts to base the peace and political process on this premise, will be entirely rejected and cannot be accepted, nor can its outcomes."
On the other hand, the Islamic Movement, accused of igniting the war and controlling the decisions of the armed forces, commented through its leader, Amin Hassan Omar, on Washingtons invitation to the armed forces by name, stating, "The entity representing the government is not the armed forces, as they are part of the state institutions. Therefore, the Sudanese state should be addressed as a party, and it is the state that determines which institution represents it."
Regarding the maneuvers of the armed forces in making a decision about the negotiations in Switzerland, journalist and political analyst Amro Shaban suggested that the recent statements by Assistant Commander of the Army, General Yasser Al-Atta, indicated their expectation of forming an international coalition to support the Sudanese army. Therefore, the armys hesitation in making a decision "may be maneuvers to buy time until this support materializes, enabling a decisive strike against the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), as desired by the army leaders."
Shaban did not rule out the possibility that the RSF might surprise everyone by refusing to negotiate, given their control over the situation on the ground. He noted that this would be the "straw that breaks the camels back," something the anti-war advocates in Sudan hope to avoid.
The RSF spokesperson stated in a statement last week that the RSF would only negotiate with the armed forces and would not allow any institution to be involved in the negotiations or talks to stop the war and ensure humanitarian access. The statement emphasized that there is no government in the country due to the October 2021 coup and the constitutional collapse caused by the war. It also described the position announced by the Sudanese Foreign Ministry regarding the Swiss negotiations as the stance of the old regime.
Journalist Wael Mahjoub pointed out that several factors influence the armed forces decision regarding the calls for negotiations in Geneva. He stated that these factors are not limited to the push and pull represented by the nature of the military alliances on the ground, whether through the National Congress and the Islamic Movement battalions that took up arms since April 15 and whose leaders have appeared in mobilization campaigns supported by government officials and military leaders in various states connected to the party and movement, or through the armed movements that signed the Juba Agreement and ended their neutrality, aligning themselves in the military conflict. These movements are clinging to their gains from the agreement and want to assert their presence in any post-war settlement.
Mahjoub further explained in his conversation with "moatinoon" that the greatest pressure comes from the situation on the ground itself, where the RSF has expanded its presence in key states and vast areas, forcing the armed forces to retreat and withdraw. He said that this situation undoubtedly creates significant pressure concerning the struggle of wills at the negotiating table and the imposition of conditions.
Mahjoub also mentioned that the armed forces have a wealth of experience in negotiations, resulting from previous wars. He noted that they understand the pitfalls of negotiating under the current conditions, which would greatly benefit the RSF in imposing their demands, especially regarding their future existence, which was one of the declared objectives of the war.
The International Community: Patience Running Thin
The catastrophic humanitarian situation in Sudan has put significant pressure on the international community after about a year and a half of war, with the rising number of civilian casualties, the extent of violations and war crimes documented by relevant international organizations, and the large numbers of displaced persons and refugees, which have exceeded 10 million. Additionally, the specter of famine has already begun to spread across large parts of the country.
Recent statements from the U.S. envoy indicated that the international communitys patience has run out with the maneuvers that have hindered previous initiatives, leading to the current situation. He stated in a press release that the international community would consider other alternatives if the warring parties in Sudan do not show enough seriousness in reaching a negotiated peaceful solution. He added that the international community would be forced to explore other ways to end the suffering of the Sudanese people if the warring parties fail to negotiate a ceasefire.
In his conversation with "moatinoon" Kamal Omar predicted that the army would seize the latest initiative and go to Geneva because the consequences of rejecting or obstructing it would not be favorable for Sudan. He stated that the responsibility for these consequences would not lie with the political leadership but with the army leadership, represented by the head of the Sovereignty Council.
Omar expressed optimism that rational leadership could steer matters in favor of the citizen and the countrys stability, noting that the international community supports the armed forces. He said, "It is true that their position on the ground is shaky, but internationally, and in terms of the citizens hopes and the political forces, the army is an institution that no one will allow to collapse due to an alignment with the other side."
Dr. Amani Al-Tawil, Director of the Al-Ahram Center and close to Egyptian intelligence, wrote on her Facebook page that time is running out for Al-Burhan to make his choices in light of the internal and global challenges and the resulting international measures if he rejects the Geneva forum. She hinted that the international community intends to hold an urgent United Nations session regarding placing Sudan under Chapter VII trusteeship, with an emphasis on banning military flights and preventing arms from reaching the Sudanese army.
Al-Tawil expressed regret that the selection of the delegation, the decision to participate, and the responsibility of reaching the negotiating platform also involve elements of the old regime, which also restrict the armys options or even prevent it from participating in the Geneva negotiations altogether.
However, Adil Al-Baz believes that the international community cannot do much. He told "moatinoon" that international intervention under Chapter VII, for example, is unimaginable. He added, "It happened before with the UNAMID (United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur), and what did it achieve? If military intervention by other entities occurs, it would be costly, and no one desires it or can afford it. And if it happens, it is not safe from consequences." He referred to the international communitys intervention in Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, saying, "All were failed interventions that led to catastrophic outcomes. If the international community wants to intervene positively, it should compel the RSF to implement the Jeddah agreements. This is the only path it should take to succeed in ending the war."
For his part, Amro Shaban stated that the U.S. invitation reflects the international communitys frustration with the maneuvers between the RSF and the army. He added that the international community has increasingly come to understand that the Islamists or elements of the former regime are the ones who do not want to stop the war and that they control the state apparatus and decision-making within the army, given the multiplicity of decision-making centers. Therefore, the international community is working to limit their maneuvering space.
