The 15 April war did not emerge from a vacuum. It is an extension of Sudan’s recurrent conflicts since August 1955, rooted in the absence of a coherent nation-building project capable of uniting Sudanese citizens around equal citizenship, inclusive development, democracy, and dignity for all – a paradigm fundamentally distinct from both the colonial order and the post-independence state inaugurated in 1956.
The 15 April war possesses distinct qualitative dimensions unlike the previous wars: it began in the centre and rapidly engulfed the peripheries and long-marginalised areas of Sudan, marking the pinnacle of the failure of the old nation-building project. Beyond the proliferation of armies and militias, its root causes lie first and foremost in the collapse of Sudan’s rural economy. That collapse produced millions of impoverished citizens, particularly among the younger generation, who found themselves jobless and left with carrying arms and joining militias as their only viable option – often outside the effective control of the old state. This dynamic was driven by the anger and neglect experienced by a generation marginalised socially, economically, and politically: excluded from productive sectors, shut out of the modern economy, deprived of opportunities, and denied the prospect of a sustainable livelihood.
The urban sector has been shaped by the continuous influx of rural populations into cities, generating expansive belts of impoverished residential areas. At the same time, the middle class has faded, replaced by a parasitic elite that loots the state, entrenches corruption, and facilitates state capture. This process was accelerated by the Islamists – a minority ruling elite that mobilised slogans of political Islam while governing through repression, war, and the creation of parallel institutions and militias. The result has been the proliferation of armed groups and a fragmented security sector that further eroded the state’s coherence and legitimacy. This situation has been met by genuine resistance from the Sudanese people in the rural and urban areas of Sudan, who have been struggling and dreaming of sustainable peace, freedom, and justice, and calling for change and transformation.
The current war is the outcome of a clear plan by Islamist forces that supported the 25 October 2021 coup, carried out jointly by the army and the RSF, which united against the civilian democratic transition of the December Revolution. That coup proved unsustainable, as it was staged by two incoherent forces competing over power and resources, leading to a directionless and fragmented security sector. Coupled with continuous Islamist agitation and their repeated attempts to return to power, this trajectory culminated in the 15 April war.
Consequences of the war:
– The humanitarian catastrophe:
It is the world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe that has directly impacted the lives of over 25 million civilians who are internally displaced, refugees, turned into victims in the wider rural areas and cities. It has also engulfed all of Sudan’s states, both directly and indirectly. Furthermore, it has systemically and holistically destroyed historical cities and rural areas, with violence encompassing sexual abuse against women, as well as physical abuse against children and the elderly population.
The war has witnessed the extensive use of drones and smart artillery, making it one of the first conflicts of its kind on such a scale on the African continent. It has displaced more people than the entire population of Greater London. Any attempt to address the situation in Sudan must begin by tackling the humanitarian crisis: securing the right to life for the population and ensuring robust civilian protection. It should address the question of war and peace through an integrated package that tackles the humanitarian, political, and security aspects together. The entry point must be the humanitarian situation, as there is no Sudan without its people.
We have observed that there are important attempts to address the consequences of the humanitarian situation separately, with some focusing on the issues of the displaced, sexual violence, and extensions of the arms embargo as issues that are mutually exclusive. Important as they are, these issues are all by-products of the war, and the only way to address them collectively and correctly is to stop the war through a humanitarian ceasefire and thereafter end it by addressing its root causes.
– How to preserve the Sudanese state but lend no legitimacy to the warring parties:
There is a growing tendency, regionally and internationally, to preserve the Sudanese state and not allow its collapse, which is indeed a correct approach that resonates with the will of the Sudanese people. However, we should be cautious not to lend legitimacy to the warring parties. Both parties to the conflict do not enjoy legitimacy from the Sudanese people; they have never been the people’s choice and have both committed violations against the Sudanese people and against the December Revolution.
– The regional shape of the war and its geopolitical impact:
Sudan is located in the heart of an important geopolitical belt: the Red Sea, the Horn of Africa, and the Sahel, which faces the south of Europe. These belts are obviously important for the peace and security of not only the regions but also the world.
The 15 April war is gradually entering a regional dimension, and if we are not cautious, it will engulf many countries in this belt, becoming a greater regional war, in addition to what is already taking place in the Gulf and the Red Sea.
– Famine, economic collapse, and corruption:
There is a clear indication of an imminent famine as a result of the lack of cultivation in the vast rural areas, especially the Al Gezira Scheme, which is facing irrigation problems, drought, and the war engulfing the major agricultural areas in Sudan. Areas of Kordofan and Northern Darfur are witnessing acute food shortages.
There is an economic collapse, which includes the hyperinflation of the Sudanese currency and the war-corruption network looting Sudanese resources, in addition to the lack of sufficient humanitarian corridors. The only viable and efficient response is to have a humanitarian ceasefire.
The economic crisis is multidimensional and is deepened as a result. It is a combination of decades of growth-stagnation and wrong economic choices, alongside wars that have engulfed Sudan’s rural areas for decades, whose continuation plays a major role in pushing the country further towards a point of no return and total collapse.
– The Islamists’ return and its impact on sustainable peace:
Sudan is at a crossroads: to achieve sustainable peace or return to the decades-long repression of the Islamists. The choice of the Sudanese people is clear and was demonstrated in the December Revolution of 2018. People are looking for sustainable peace, justice, and dignity for all, and a genuine civilian transition.
The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have achieved some degree of progress in the war theatre. However, the war is far from over and will not be ended by military action alone. Its root causes cannot be addressed from the barrel of a gun. What is needed instead is a nation-building framework capable of bringing Sudan’s diverse peoples together and tackling the structural drivers of the conflict.
It would pose a threat and represent a profound failure for the SAF to treat its battlefield gains as a tactical opportunity to restore Islamist rule and resume state capture. The Islamists would only perpetuate the wars and marginalisation of the past against the majority of the Sudanese people, deepen the politicisation of the state – particularly the security sector – and continue to use violence against the population. As before, this would only contribute immensely to instability in Sudan, the region, and beyond.
Therefore, a genuine end to this war and a path to sustainable peace are in direct contradiction with the return of the Islamists, given their infamous résumé. Sudan needs a paradigm shift, which cannot be achieved under dictatorship.
– Building a security sector and a single army:
There will be no stability, development, or democracy without building a proper security sector and a single, unified army. Nor will that be possible without a civilian, democratic transition.
The multiplicity of armies and militias must end. Sudan needs a single, professional army that reflects the country’s diversity and accepts civilian rule and the peaceful exchange of power. All militias must be disbanded, and we should end the decades of impunity.
– Immigration and the right to stay:
If Sudanese people do not have the right to remain in their own country and on their own land, then millions of displaced Sudanese and refugees will inevitably seek space abroad. The real solution to migration is to create internal space for the Sudanese people.
– Unity and sovereignty of Sudan:
Given the experiences of the past that led to the independence of South Sudan, Sudan needs to preserve its unity by embracing a new dispensation and national agenda capable of rallying all its people, while safeguarding its sovereignty amid an increasingly challenging regional and international geopolitical landscape.
– Reparations and Restitution for war victims:
The peace agreement should include reparations and restitution for the millions of victims of Sudan’s war, as well as the building of institutions of social cohesion capable of providing support and nurturing cooperative associations for those affected.
– Victims of Khartoum, Al Gezira, White-Nile, Sinnar, and Northern Kordofan States:
Very little has been done to collect comprehensive data on the war’s victims in Khartoum, Al Gezira, White Nile, Sennar, and Northern Kordofan states, alongside the areas of Sudan that have historically witnessed war and genocide. It is essential for human rights organisations and civil society to systematically document the victims of war across all of Sudan, in order to end impunity and build a new, just system for all Sudanese that does not disregard any victim.
– December Revolution is very much alive:
All indications and current events inside Sudan, despite the war, show that the people’s will has not been broken. There is growing discontent, with protests and strikes escalating even in the midst of the war. A mass movement is developing every day, carrying forward the dreams and aspirations of the December Revolution.
Any calculation that depends solely on the military situation has no future. Real legitimacy lies in the hands of the people and the forces of revolution and change. The war will end, sooner or later, but the legitimacy and will of the December Revolution will outlive it.
– The way forward:
A) African and UN Peace and Security Councils:
The shortest possible route to peace, given the current complicated circumstances and regional and international polarisation, is to adopt the African Peace and Security Council’s resolution calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Sudan and table it before the United Nations Security Council as an African proposal. This would bring together African, Arab, and international actors against the background of polarisation in the UNSC and open the way for a more conducive environment to secure a humanitarian ceasefire in Sudan. Such a ceasefire would protect civilians, be monitored by an international peace mission, widen civilian space, and open the door to a credible political process.
B) What is needed from the region and international community?
The plan that has garnered the most support among Sudanese people is the Quartet’s roadmap, which addresses the questions of the humanitarian situation, the civilian transition, the return of the Islamists, and the armed groups. There are contradictions between regional and international players, and what is being labelled a ‘realistic’ approach must not become a recipe for fragile, piecemeal solutions that reproduce war. This war should be the last in Sudan.
Attempts to merge the Quartet and the Quintet are facing challenges. The Sudanese people must be sufficiently consulted from the outset, especially the anti-war movement.
C) A call for direct dialogue between the Army and the anti-war movement:
A genuine dialogue between the anti-war movement and the Sudanese Armed Forces is needed. It requires a conducive environment and confidence-building measures, and should begin immediately on neutral ground outside Sudan. It should eventually include dialogue with the RSF and its allies, as soon as possible, aimed at lifting the suffering of the Sudanese people and adhering to their will, demands and their long struggle for a true democratic transition.
