The power struggle between the Sudanese army and the powerful Rapid Support Forces (FAR) paramilitary group since mid-April has plunged the country into the biggest crisis since the 2019 ouster of Omar al-Bashir. , who lived in a delicate balance of power in the armed forces, clash in the streets of the capital, Khartoum, and have thrown the country into chaos when it was close to forming a civilian government with the mandate to call democratic elections. The conflict has left at least 850 dead and has caused the displacement of more than 1.3 million people in a key country for stability in the Horn of Africa. So far, the US-Saudi sponsored talks in Jeddah have been unsuccessful. "I'm not at all optimistic," admits the former Sudanese diplomat Abdelwahab El-Affendi, who is now rector and president of the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies and who recently visited Barcelona invited by the Institut Europeu de la Mediterrània (IEmed).
None of the agreed ceasefires have worked. How far are we from the end of the crisis?
I don't think we're close to any solution because they haven't even started talking about it. They only talk about a temporary humanitarian ceasefire and they haven't even respected it. The militias should have evacuated hospitals and other places such as water stations, electricity stations, private homes... But none of that has happened. On the contrary, now they have attacked more hospitals and houses.
Have the talks in Yida failed?
There has been no implementation. The second deal was even less demanding than the first. The first said that "you should not" occupy hospitals, houses, civilian facilities... And the second says that the parties "must abstain." What has been interpreted, especially by the military, as "what you have you keep, but do not do it again."
Why don't they respect him?
The militias know that if they leave their homes or hospitals they will be more exposed to the military and will lose the comfort of the place where they are staying. They have chosen nice houses, they have food supply, they have kept the money and jewelry… Therefore, they are not ready to give up this good source of income, security and protection.
Some say this violence is a kind of coup by the old regime.
All the evidence points to the fact that the FAR wanted to take control. They are the ones who started this. They started by trying to take over an airport in the north near the Libyan border. The reason could be that they wanted their supporters, the Emirates, to supply them with more weapons from Libya, and they needed an airport for that.
Is the army not responsible?
No.
He affirms that without a military solution there can be no democracy.
Statehood requires a single, disciplined military force. If you have more than one force point you don't have the Weberian monopoly on violence. We have two armies... You cannot have a civil State in this situation, much less a democratic State. For there to be democracy there must be military discipline. A professional, neutral army that does not engage in politics. What we see in Khartoum is that the army cannot do its job. The state has collapsed. There are robberies, insecurity, hundreds of disappearances, rapes... There is no police, there is no judiciary... So if you lose military control, you don't have a State and, therefore, you can't have democracy.
Can the army be neutral?
At the moment we need an army. Because then it can be reformed. Many people say that we should disband the army and start over. But I say that if we don't have an army, politicians who want more freedom won't be able to walk the streets. At this time all the politicians have disappeared. Most of them are abroad. Everyone is afraid because there is no law.
Not only politicians have left, 1.3 million people have left their homes. Are we close to a humanitarian crisis?
We are not close, we are beyond catastrophic. The biggest humanitarian catastrophe, I think, in the world right now. It's not just a matter of supplies, it's a matter of insecurity. Even if humanitarian aid arrives there is no way to deliver it because aid workers will not be safe. The state elite has disappeared. Businessmen, bureaucrats, doctors, lawyers, all those on whom the State depends for its repair. If it's a temporary emergency, they may come back. But if it drags on, these people who usually have the money and the talent probably won't come back.
Is Sudan a failed state?
The State has to admit that it does not exist at the moment. He can't protect you, he can't arrest you, he can't pay your wages or help you get food.
News arrives of new killings in Western Darfur.
Many people in Darfur have suffered because of the militia. Many of them had their land stolen, and since the militia is now in trouble, some of the former victims are trying to take advantage of this opportunity. There are also people from outside Sudan, especially in West Africa, who are joining the conflict. Many of the militia recruits come from Mali, Chad, Central Africa...
Are they now in Sudan?
There have been calls on social media for people to come from these areas. Also, the fact that there is so much looting has also tempted some people from those areas, deprived areas, to come and join in the looting. That may be tempting for some of the groups that are already militarized, like Boko Haram and others. So that's a big risk. But so far, it has not materialized.
Are regional power struggles influencing?
At the moment, not much. The Emirates are supporting [FAR leader] Hemedti, at least in the media, trying to tell his side of his story. But I think most African and Arab countries do not want Sudan to go the way of Yemen and Syria. They can't afford it. I do not see the international dynamic at work in this crisis. The naive rhetoric of the UN could be a danger in this regard. By saying that "both parties must be punished" they tilt the balance on the side of the militia because it does not depend on anything legal. So if you punish the army, you punish Sudan.
