Why Türkiye has key to end Sudan’s calamitous war

Sudan's army soldiers (SAF) celebrate after recapturing Wad Madani from the paramilitary Rapid Support Services (RSF), marking a possible turning point in a devastating near two-year civil war in Sudan on January 12, 2025.
 

Photo credit: Reuters

Sudan’s war may find a solution in the very international partners that have been accused of fuelling it. 

A new situational analysis on the flow of the war since April 2023 shows that warring parties, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), have been winning and losing battles, making it uncertain when the war may stop.

Global conflict watchdog Crisis Group observed on Tuesday that the fate of such see-saw of a fight rests on partners of Sudan, including those accused of fomenting the violence, or hosting protagonists. They include Türkiye, Gulf states such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia, as well as Egypt and Sudan’s immediate neighbours in the Horn of Africa.

These countries, the Crisis Group argues, may have had their hands already soiled by taking sides or sending weapons to Sudan. But it is they who may yet rescue the country in a complex set of compromises.

“They should push the parties to come back to the table, giving peace a chance while it might still be possible to put Sudan back together again,” the Crisis Group said in the analysis, Sudan’s Calamitous War: Finding a Path toward Peace, published on Tuesday.

“The alternative looks hellish. Left unchecked, Sudan’s war will only spread, engulfing more of the country and maybe soon expanding beyond its borders. In that scenario, no one would win, and many would lose,” Crisis Group said.

For Sudan, where more than 23,000 people have died, some 11 million displaced and millions of dollars’ worth of infrastructure destroyed, tapping these countries into mediation is complicated. In fact, they tried before and failed.

The US and Saudi Arabia tried the Jeddah Process, whose recommendations were ignored by warring parties. Egypt offered to mediate, but didn’t go far.

The Horn of Africa, through the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (Igad) tried too, but countries here fell into usual trap of being perceived as taking sides. 

And it didn’t help that the African Union considered the SAF an illegitimate government after toppling a civilian administration in 2021.

Left into the continual warp of suspicions, the war has gone on for close to two years now, with sides winning some and losing some.

Now, 20 months later, the Crisis Group says there must be some compromise. It should start with a mediator with the least baggage: Türkiye.

While the outside countries that have led or played a central role in ceasefire discussions should renew efforts to convene the parties for talks, Türkiye “appears for now well positioned to marshal talks.” 

One, Ankara has been accepted by most of the parties in the war, with only the RSF yet to commit. 

“Türkiye’s close ties with hardline (Omar) Bashir-era Islamists, close allies of Burhan’s during the war, could prove a game changer, given Islamist resistance to peace efforts thus far. The army chief, for his part, has reaffirmed his support for Turkish-led mediation,” Crisis Group said of SAF leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. 

Although RSF has not said if it will go to the table, Türkiye has since righted relations with the UAE and Egypt, both of whom have influential stakes in Sudan war.

Egypt, an ally of SAF, is interested to end the war because it already has a burden on its western border in Libya. The UAE, on its part, may need an urgent reputational damage control, having been accused of fuelling RSF.

But Türkiye must learn from previous failed bids, especially the mistrust that exists between warring factions keen to continue fighting.

One solution is to tender a provisional vision for how Sudan will be governed after the war, including how to secure interests of parties at play, and their international backers.

“The power struggle between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces is linked to the web of external alliances that have both fuelled the war and made it harder to resolve,” said Murithi Mutiga, Crisis Group’s Africa programme director.

“In order to reach a ceasefire and find a way out of the conflict, the outside actors with the biggest stakes in Sudan’s civil war, notably the UAE and Egypt, will need to exert greater pressure on their Sudanese allies to come to the table.”

That means one compromise that even Sudanese civilians may find hard to swallow: allowing role for SAF or RSF, or their proxies to continue playing a role.

As it is, both sides may want out of war if it guarantees their interests. After all they both face expensive sanctions, losses on the battlefield and a damaged legitimacy.” 

“The war has further fragmented the country too. Khartoum is now a battered war zone, emptied of at least half its population while the rest of the country is being carved up into competing zones of control,” added Shewit Woldemichael, Sudan senior analyst at Crisis Group.