The situation has reached a critical point. Street clashes between Sudan’s warring factions have exacerbated pre-existing humanitarian needs and resulted in the forced displacement of nearly 5.1 million individuals, both within Sudan and across neighboring countries. 

“25 million people, more than half the population of Sudan, [are in]need [of]humanitarian aid and protection,” said Ramesh Rajasingham, Head and Representative of OCHA in Geneva.

The current turmoil in Sudan is a consequence of yet another governmental system breakdown in the nation and is a single crisis within the broader spectrum of political challenges that have occurred throughout Sudan’s history.

In December 2018, a wave of protests erupted in the city of Atbara, driven by grievances over Sudan’s deteriorating economic crisis, escalating food prices, widespread corruption and high unemployment rates. 

These initial protests swiftly spread across the nation, eventually reaching the capital, Khartoum. By April 2019, President Omar al-Bashir was ousted by the Sudanese army following months of demonstrations, bringing an end to his three-decade-long grip on power. The military, holding considerable influence, took steps to solidify its authority by suspending the constitution and imposing a three-month state of emergency.

Protests persisted as demonstrators called for a transition of power to civilian authorities. In an effort to dismantle the protest movement, armed individuals affiliated with the RSF militia killed 128 people in what came to be known as the Khartoum massacre. 

The escalation of violence prompted Ethiopia and the African Union to step in and act as mediators. Following negotiations, civilian leaders and the military agreed to share power and establish a governing body, called the Sovereignty Council, to rule over Sudan for a three-year transition period. 

This council faced significant challenges as military authorities and civilian counterparts refused to cooperate, which, alongside mounting political tension, led to an attempted – and failed – coup by remaining members of President Bashir’s regime. 

In October 2021, a splinter faction from the civilian protesters started a sit-in in front of the presidential palace and called for a military takeover. In response, thousands of pro-democracy supporters came out on the streets in a show of continued support for civilian rule. 

General Burhan and General Daglo, responding to the protests, jointly orchestrated a military coup in 2021 which led to the dissolution of Sudan’s power-sharing government and council, as well as disruption of its transition to democracy. Burhan justified his actions by claiming it was meant to prevent a potential civil war in Sudan, citing the incitement by politicians against the military as a threat. He portrayed his actions as a transitional measure rather than a coup, aiming to maintain stability until the upcoming elections.

More than a year after the military coup, an agreement was signed by the Sudanese military and a coalition of civilian actors that forged a path to a more civilian-centered government. Under the new framework deal, the military would step back and would only be represented on a security and defense council. While the agreement was a major accomplishment and a show of compromise, its success was uncertain as it excluded formal rebel groups and others who had the capacity and power to undermine the transitional government. 

The fear of the agreement’s potential collapse materialized when conflict emerged between the military leaders concerning the integration of the RSF into the national military. Implementing military reforms to establish a competent and standardized national army was seen as one of the first steps to adhering to the internationally recognized agreement for the transfer of power. 

General Burhan advocated for the planned integration of the RSF to take place within a two-year timeframe, while Dagalo insisted on stretching it out over a decade. As a result, disagreement resulted in a struggle for power, with neither displaying any signs of relenting. 

Central Khartoum became a war zone as the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) conducted airstrikes aimed at RSF forces who in response, retaliated using artillery and anti-aircraft weaponry. 

The international community denounced the escalation of violence in Khartoum. Volker Türk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, expressed strong condemnation for the indiscriminate violence, emphasizing that both sides had disregarded international humanitarian law. 

In an effort to hold all those undermining peace in the country, the United States and UK imposed sanctions on five businesses that have been linked with bankrolling and providing support to the Sudanese army and RSF. 

“At least 5,000 people have been killed and over 12,000 wounded” said Volker Perthes, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Sudan. 

6.3 million people – 13% of Sudan’s population – are experiencing emergency levels of hunger – just one step from famine, with the conflict continuing to disrupt access to humanitarian aid, water, food and medicine. 

In an effort to put an end to fighting, Saudi Arabia and the United States facilitated a seven-day ceasefire on May 22 between Sudan’s army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). This temporary cessation of hostilities provided some respite and allowed limited humanitarian access. 

However, the ceasefire has since lapsed, and the subsequent ceasefires were primarily implemented to facilitate unrestricted movement and the delivery of humanitarian aid across the nation. Additionally, efforts made in July by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) to mediate a peace agreement were rejected by the Sudanese army. 

So what happens now?

It’s unclear. The political landscape of Sudan has historically been unstable with a pattern of short-lived agreements. However, continued violence of this nature in Africa’s third largest country poses a real risk to destabilize the wider region and contributes to the mass exodus of the civilian population that bears the brunt of the suffering. 

With current peace talks in Jeddah stagnating, the fate of Sudan hangs in the balance. It is essential that the two military forces, with the well-being of the Sudanese people in mind, accept and adhere to a long-term ceasefire and bring an end to the hostilities.

The post What’s Happening in Sudan? appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

In late October 2021, U.S. Envoy to the Horn of Africa Jeffrey Feltman met with the two power-sharing leaders of Sudan’s transitional government. Lt. Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the country’s army chief, expressed frustration over the leadership of Abdalla Hamdok, its civilian prime minister, and his cabinet. General al-Burhan argued that Hamdok should be deposed and replaced with a technocratic government. 

When Feltman got off a plane in Qatar the next day, he realized al-Burhan had meant these words literally.

Hours after their meeting, the Lt. General detained Hamdok, arrested top civilian leaders in the Sudanese government and fired ambassadors that resisted the emerging coup d’etat. Hamdok was placed under house arrest, and General al-Burhan declared a state of emergency to keep things nebulous for both Sudanese citizens and the international community. The Sovereignty Council — Sudan’s collective head of state made up of five military and five civilian leaders — was also dissolved. 

Word spread that the military had ousted the civilian government, and the country’s citizens reacted quickly.

Protesters immediately took to the streets, but they were met with fierce opposition. Members of civilian groups like the Sudanese Professionals Association and Freedom of Forces and Change reported ten casualties and over 140 injured over two days.

A coup was underway, and the international community — especially U.S. foreign policy officials — were shocked. 

“The acts of the military today represent an unacceptable betrayal of the Sudanese people and their journey to democracy,” said UK Foreign Office minister Vicky Ford. Other western diplomats expressed similar concern.

“We continue to recognize the Prime Minister and his cabinet as the constitutional leaders of the transitional government,” said the European Union delegation to Sudan in a joint statement with the embassies of France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the U.S.

Two Years of Budding Democracy

This upheaval of Sudanse democracy is especially disappointing to civilian leaders, researchers and the international community, who helped build a democratic Sudan following the ousting of dictator Omar al-Bashir two years prior. 

“We are back to square one,” said Dr. Jihad Mashamoun, a Sudanese researcher and analyst. 

A deterioration of the country’s economy coupled with a general lack of faith in al-Bashir resulted in widespread protests and calls for his deposition. In April 2019, with the support of civilian groups, the military removed al-Bashir from office and dissolved his cabinet. In addition, they announced a three-month state of emergency and a subsequent two-year transitional government until a concrete democratic government could be agreed upon.

At the creation of these agreements, civilian leaders remained skeptical of the military as heralds of democracy. They saw the military takeover as a blatant power-grab and therefore the civilian leaders continued to remain well-organized even as their stability was threatened. This has proven beneficial since they were able to mobilize immediately after the coup was underway. Even after the Internet blackout, organizers distributed paper flyers to inform the public about mass demonstrations.

One Month After the Coup

In the month following, conditions in Sudan fluctuated in both directions. In November, the military announced a new ruling council that would exclude the civilian leaders that they have been sharing power with since 2019. When protesters took to the streets, they were met with even harsher resistance. The military used tear gas quickly and liberally against protestors, and within hours they were shooting live rounds into crowds. This practice continued for over a month.

On Nov. 17, Sudanese military forces killed 14 protesters on their bloodiest day yet, in addition to injuring hundreds more. The Central Committee of Sudanese Doctors voiced alarm at the inundation that hospitals experienced, saying that protesters were arriving with wounds from all types of violence, including live bullets. They also reported that military personnel were storming hospitals, beating medical staff and arresting injured protesters. 

Despite international pressure on General al-Burhan to restore civilian leadership, he remained undeterred in his quest for power. 

“They lied to him. This is very serious, because when you lie to the U.S., you have to pay the consequences,” said Nureldin Satti, Sudan’s ambassador to the United States. 

And consequences were paid.

The United States and the World Bank have all suspended billions of dollars in economic relief to Sudan; this aid was critical for pulling the country out of economic isolation, several years of inflation and rising debt. Moreover, the African Union has suspended Sudan from all activities, and the UN has pledged to hold peace talks. 

“If the military puts this train back on its tracks and does what’s necessary, I think the support that has been very strong from the international community can resume,” said U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to Sudanese military officials.

At first, these efforts did not appear to be influential to General al-Burhan, as he and his close team of military officers denied ever staging a coup. Instead, he defended the military’s actions, arguing that this is merely a correction to the transition to democracy and that protesters are inciting violence and attacking officers meant to reinforce peace.

This perspective does not resemble the testimony from civilian leaders. With stronger democratic institutions, military leaders may have feared facing national or international war crime charges for actions during the Bashir era. Sudan’s transition to democracy also threatened Burhan’s potential to control the country’s lucrative gold trade. To avoid legal repercussions for human rights abuses and expand their economic fortune, Burhan and his close advisors likely sought to prevent a successful transition. 

On Nov. 12, dynamics changed. The freeze of international aid made the military takeover more complex, and Hamdok’s image as a hero strengthened the resistance movement on the streets. Sudanese citizens — fatigued from decades of military leadership and grappling with a death toll of 41 — remained steadfast in their willingness to die for change. They were heard loud and clear, as observers say that military officers within Burhan’s ranks threatened to oust him if he failed to negotiate a power-sharing agreement with civilians. After four months of detention, Hamdok returned to power under a shared agreement with Burhan. In an effort to “put an end to the bloodshed,” as Hamdok put it, both men signed a 14-point agreement to share power and develop their own governments.

Sudan Today

This deal sealed Hamdok’s fate, however, and at the start of the new year, Sudan took a turn for the worse.

Citing an inability to successfully mediate an agreement, Hamdok resigned as prime minister on Jan. 2. He faced pressure from Sudanese citizens since protestors rejected the 14-point deal made with General al-Burhan one month earlier, who instead saw it as a concession to the military. Protesters now brace for the worst, as the death toll is climbing toward 60 and the military is expected to renege on promises to hold elections. Sudan lacks the political institutions and independent structures needed to appoint a new prime minister, putting the country in dire circumstances.

“Our country is going through a dangerous turning point that may threaten its entire survival if it is not remedied soon,” Hamdok said in his resignation speech. 

The fate of Sudan now lies in a tug-of-war between the country’s most powerful military leaders and the unflinching resistance of the public.

The post Three Months Later: What We Know About the October Coup d’etat in Sudan appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.