The recent spur in conflict in Sudan has caused concern regarding the country turning to civil war. Without a doubt, this would be a disastrous development for the Sudanese, a people already struggling with a food insecurity crisis and mass displacement; 3.7 million Sudanese are already internally displaced. According to Save the Children, a third of the population (15.8 million) are in need of humanitarian assistance. Gunfire and explosions have proliferated across the capital of Khartoum, where the majority of the city's 5 million people are sheltering at home without electricity or access to food or water. In less than a week, as many as 20,000 people have fled from the region of Darfur and crossed the border into Chad, a country that already hosts 400,000 refugees and has limited resources. As of the publication of this article, 420 people have been killed and at least 3,551 injured. 

External Competition

In addition to the concern over casualties, there needs to be consideration regarding the involvement of external actors that could exacerbate the conflict. A plethora of foreign countries have already become involved, some of which are trying to invoke diplomacy and foster stability. However, there are others who are exacerbating the conflict, such as the Egyptian military and a Libyan militia, by supplying arms to opposite sides. “Khalifa Haftar, the commander of a faction that controls eastern Libya, dispatched at least one plane to fly military supplies to Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces [... while] Egypt sent warplanes and pilots to back the Sudanese military”. 

While the US State Department is preparing to impose sanctions on the two parties, it is doubtful that they will be adhered to or serve as a warning to others. This has become evident as Russia and the UAE team up to evade sanctions; “on the Emirati-Russian front, everything seems to be going smoothly: for a year now, hundreds of Russian companies have been created to circumvent Western sanctions, while banned oligarchs continue to do business and maintain their fortunes.” Both countries are supporting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti; there is little doubt that this partnership would not extend to military action in Sudan. Russian and Emirati involvement is alarming given the Wagner Group’s track record of “alleged torture, mass killings and looting in several war-torn countries”, alongside the allegation circulating that the UAE was behind an attempted coup by the RSF, a major cause of the conflict. 

The regional powers (Ethiopia, Eritrea, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE) and the international powers (China, the EU, Russia, and the US) involved will play a critical role in how the conflict develops. “Sudan’s strategic position on the Red Sea, its access to the Nile River and vast gold reserves have long been coveted by outside powers.” Russia has already played a role in plundering Sudan’s gold reserves through collusion with the Sudanese military; they were given access to gold reserves in exchange for political and military support. This has enabled “billions of dollars in gold to bypass the Sudanese state and to deprive the poverty-stricken country of hundreds of millions in state revenue.” US officials confirmed that Russia was behind the 2021 coup that placed General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan in power as the de facto head of state. Russia has evaded sanctions by using Sudan’s gold to fund their war efforts in Ukraine while backing military rule in Sudan and expanding Wagner activities. It is exceptionally doubtful that Russia is concerned with the stability of the nation or the realities faced by civilians. One has only to look at Russia’s nefarious activities throughout the continent regarding disinformation, human rights violations, and their inability to effectivey abate terrorism in several nations across the continent.

Risk of Terrorism

The conflict also opens the door to terrorist groups, who are likely to take advantage of the instability and make their own attempts in acquiring access to crucial resources and infrastructure, such as oil fields and ports. “The Sahel is the region of the world most affected by terrorism, recording a noticeable deterioration in 2022 [...]”. The proliferation of terrorist groups in Sudan would also exacerbate the battle for influence among foreign nations. Suspected Wagner ties with General Hemedti, though denied, set the stage for Western nations to possibly become involved in more than just diplomacy. A greater dependency on Wagner in Sudan would, without a doubt, impact Sudan’s relations with other African nations and impact western counter-terrorism efforts. A Wagner expansion into Sudan would be very damaging; not only when concerned with foreign relations and security sector reform, but also with human rights. Regarding Wagner, the State Department stated that “The interference of such entities in Sudan’s internal conflict will only lead to more human suffering and delay the country’s transition to democracy.”

Additionally, resources could be pulled from other vulnerable nations and causes to apply focus on Sudan, creating further discord in Africa. As the Sahel becomes the epicentre of terrorism, the conflict in Sudan could have a disastrous effect on counter-terrorism efforts on the continent, furthering the decline in democracy, encouraging greater migration crises, and creating new conflicts in the region. As Sudan plummets further into insecurity, it is ever more likely that groups associated with al-Qaeda or the Islamic State will become intertwined in the conflict.

Power Struggles

The conflict in Sudan is at a critical precipice. As of now, the impression is that the generals will fight to the end. “This conflict intends to name the next president,” says Bashir El-Shariff, a professor of political science at the Islamic University of Omdurman. A diplomat added, “There is a Gordian knot to be cut between them.” It is clear that both generals are disregarding the impacts on the Sudanese people as the country is driven into further turmoil; evidenced by the repeated dismissal of previous agreements. As is shown through the worry of Sudan’s neighbours, instability rarely stays localised. Alan Boswell of the International Crisis Group poignantly stated, “What happens in Sudan will not stay in Sudan. [...] The longer (the fighting) drags on the more likely it is we see major external intervention.” 

Norway’s ambassador to Sudan, Endre Stiansen, echoed his sentiments; “one of the worst things that can happen is that this becomes a regional conflict where countries in the neighbourhood intervene on behalf of either of the parties.” While mediation is critically needed, governments that provide military supplies will generate an environment of bedlam that will be difficult to recover from. Unless foreign powers are able to quickly and successfully mediate the conflict, Sudan will be thrown into a civil war with international backing. Should the conflict continue on its current trajectory, the impacts will be felt across the continent while governments and militias fight each other for influence.