The war raging in Sudan since mid-April 2023 is not isolated from a long historical context that this African-Arab country has experienced since before its colonization in 1889 and then its independence after World War II. However, this war significantly differs from all the civil wars that Sudan has known, which have cost its people their stability and future prospects. This is not only because it is the only long-term war that the country's capital has witnessed, causing extensive destruction, but also due to its strong association with intense foreign interventions and overlapping agendas.
In this article, we will try to provide an explanation for this context, which involves intertwined internal and external agendas and complex interconnections.
The conflict and competition between Christianity and Islam have been a constant presence in Sudan, in one form or another, in all external interventions and the fueling of conflicts in this geographically significant and resource-rich country, which is diverse in cultures, ethnicities, and religions. The fervor of Islamic zeal has remained strong in Sudan. Therefore, it was not surprising that Sudan witnessed the "Mahdist Revolution" with its Islamic identity and jihadist approach (1881-1889), which overthrew the Turkish-Egyptian rule that had toppled the Blue Sultanate or the Islamic Kingdom of Sennar. The Mahdist rebels killed the British General Gordon Pasha, the then Governor-General of Sudan.
Western and American Economic and Political Pressures on Sudan Remained Present Even During the Democratic Rule
The Islamic identity and Arabic language could have expanded in Africa through Sudan, which was the most qualified country for that. However, the British colonialists, who came in the wake of the Crusades, realized this early on. After overthrowing the Mahdist state following their invasion in 1889, with the cooperation of the Khedive's rule in Egypt, they issued what became known as the "Closed Districts Ordinance." This law designated certain areas in Sudan where entry or residence by foreigners and Sudanese was prohibited without official permission, covering seven scattered regions in Darfur, Kordofan, and Southern Sudan.
One aspect of this law was preventing Northern Sudanese from establishing schools in the South, even if they were allowed to reside there. If a Northern Sudanese married a Southern woman, he could not take his children with him when returning to Northern Sudan. In 1922, the Closed Districts Ordinance was confined to Southern Sudan. In 1930, further regulations aimed to prevent Northern traders from settling in the South and to halt the spread of Arab culture and Islam in Southern Sudan. Even wearing traditional Arab clothing such as the jellabiya and turban was prohibited for Southerners!
However, this policy was suddenly abandoned after World War II, specifically in 1946. Since it had been in place for over 30 years, it caused a deep rift in the fabric of Sudanese society, which later led to civil wars between the North and South in three rounds. The first began in August 1955, just before independence, with a rebellion that was quickly suppressed. The second occurred in 1963 and lasted nine years, while the third started in 1983 and continued for 20 years, culminating in a "Comprehensive Peace Agreement" that led to a referendum for Southern Sudanese self-determination. As a result, they chose to establish their independent state.
The Vicious Cycle
Throughout the nearly 70 years of national governance in Sudan, the country has not experienced stable rule. Its elected parliaments have never passed a permanent constitution. The constant alternation between a multiparty democratic system and a military-style authoritarian regime, which is then overthrown by a popular revolution followed by a short transitional period, only to be followed by another coup, has come to be known as the "vicious cycle." After its independence, Sudan saw the establishment of three elected parliaments that brought multiparty governments, each of which was overthrown by a military coup (in 1958, 1969, and 1989). Subsequently, three popular revolutions (in 1964, 1985, and 2019) toppled the regimes described as authoritarian. Each was followed by a short transitional period, and the cycle continued.
When the Islamic identity of President Bashir's rule became evident, Western pressures began mounting on the regime to change its course
However, what stands out in all this political turmoil is the ongoing presence of the national identity issue and its relationship with Arab culture and the Islamic religion. Western economic and political pressures, generally, and American pressures specifically, continued to weigh heavily on Sudan. This persisted even during the period of democratic rule that followed the fall of President Nimeiry's regime, where demands intensified to abolish Islamic Sharia laws. Moreover, arms continued to flow to Southern rebels under the leadership of John Garang until the democratic government was overthrown (1986-1989), when President Omar al-Bashir seized power in a military coup later backed by the National Islamic Front, driven by the aim to prevent the country from falling into the hands of rebels advancing northward with external support opposed to Islamic-oriented or even independent rule in Sudan.
When President al-Bashir's Islamic identity (1989-2019) became apparent, coinciding with the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and the United States' hegemony over the world stage, along with its Western allies, intense pressures swiftly began on the new Sudanese regime to change its direction or face isolation and ousting.
America exploited grave mistakes made by the regime, imposing an economic blockade that lasted 27 years and a diplomatic siege that isolated it from its near and far neighbors. This contributed to embracing northern opposition by its neighbors, in addition to expanding support for armed rebellion that extended beyond its control zones in southern directorates to areas like the Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, and eastern Sudan, traditionally associated with the north. This pressure persisted until nearing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005 under American, British, and Norwegian auspices. Western pressure groups successfully fanned the flames in Darfur between what they labeled African-origin tribes and those designated as Arab-origin, including Arab Rizeigat tribes to which Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemeti), leader of the Rapid Support Forces, belongs.
"UNITAMS" Mission
The joint United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) was nearing the completion of its mission in Darfur when the regime of "Salvation" was overthrown in April 2019. In accordance with the new Sudanese government's vision, both military and civilian wings, Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok sent a letter to the UN Secretary-General requesting the dispatch of a UN mission under Chapter VI to "support the transitional period in Sudan". The UN Security Council approved this request, issuing consecutive resolutions to terminate UNAMID's mandate and appoint the German Volker Perthes to lead a smaller mission, "UNITAMS", with broad authority to contribute to supporting Sudan's democratic transition.
The Plan Overseen by the United Nations Mission (UNITAMS) Aimed at Disbanding and Restructuring the Sudanese Army
The approach taken by Perthes's mission exacerbated internal divisions in Sudan. He isolated all those affiliated with the National Congress Party, which had governed for three decades, and sought to re-engineer Sudanese society politically, economically, and socially through the new civilian authority in Khartoum. This included repealing Islamic laws, allowing banking interest (riba), and beginning to modify educational curricula to reduce Islamic religious burdens, leading to increased political and social tensions.
More significantly, the United Nations mission overseeing the transitional period introduced a plan widely interpreted as aimed at dismantling and restructuring the Sudanese army, portraying it as the "Islamic regime's army" that had been ousted. This approach, reminiscent of actions by Paul Bremer in Iraq, was perceived to be backed by the United States and some regional allies.
Framework Agreement
To succeed, this plan necessitated creating divisions within the military ranks, particularly between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF. It is widely speculated that the UN mission received support from external powers, along with civilian forces that had previously governed in partnership with the military under a constitutional document. After the military side dissolved this partnership and consolidated power on October 25, 2021, the UN mission oversaw the development of what later became known as the "Framework Agreement." This agreement engineered political isolation processes and the restructuring of the Sudanese army, with indications that RSF leadership would play a foundational role in the newly structured army, purportedly to safeguard democracy and civilian governance.
UNAMIS' Intervention in Internal Affairs Aims to Return Sudan to Western Secular States
Despite the tensions and military buildup by the RSF since December 2022, and the increased likelihood of armed confrontation between the Sudanese army and these forces, the UN mission led by Perthes, originally intended to assist in resolving challenges during the transitional period, has not remained passive. Many perceive that, influenced by international and regional forces, the mission has exacerbated tensions by heavily intervening in Sudan's internal affairs. This intervention included the deliberate isolation of significant political forces within Sudanese society.
Through this intervention, supported by direct external backing, the mission aims to return Sudan to the ranks of Western secular states, enhance relations with Israel, and establish a rupture between the society and the previous Islamic-leaning regime.
These developments culminated in extreme tension, reaching its peak on April 12, 2023, when heavily armed RSF forces headed to Meroe Airport in northern Sudan, where Egyptian Air Force units were conducting training missions. Just three days later, the situation exploded, when RSF forces attacked military installations of the Sudanese army in Khartoum, including the headquarters of the Armed Forces General Command. This led to the deaths of over 30 officers and soldiers who were guarding these facilities.
The conflict has now approached its eighteenth month, marked not only by atrocities, crimes, and violations but also by intense external interference. This includes the supply of various weapons, ammunition, and vehicles, as well as the recruitment of mercenaries from West and East Africa, and even from South Sudan, to fight alongside the RSF. This has been documented by the UN experts monitoring arms flows to Darfur and the establishment under Security Council Resolution 1591 (2007), who regularly report to the Secretary-General and the Security Council, supported by satellite imagery and reports from international media institutions.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Read this Article in Arabic
