Sudan’s conflict: Beyond a Proxy War – an Interview with Dr. Nisrin Elamin

All Africa: Before we discuss the background to the war adn what’s happening to the Sudanese people now, could you characterize the escalating conflict over the past two years. A number of Sudanese I’ve talked to say they don’t like to call it a civil war, but a proxy war between armies backed by outside powers. Civilians caught in the middle want peace, stability, and democracy. Do you agree with that assessment?

Dr. Elamin: There is a proxy element in the sense that if all of the foreign actors that are involved – the UAE on the RSF side, Egypt and other countries on the army side – if they where all to withdraw their support, then things on the ground would look very different, and there might be more pressure to resolve what is happening. But I think the proxy war framing absolves the Sudanese military elites that are responsible for starting this war.

I think it’s vital to frame this war as an internationalized counter-revolutionary war that is protecting the interests of Sudanese elites and their international partners. Part of its purpose is to ensure that there will not be civilian rule and popular democracy. That’s part of what explains the brutality of this war.

All Africa: So in essence, you see the shorthand of calling this a proxy war goes some way towards absolving the internal parties of their duty and the accountability that they need to have.

Dr. Elamin: Yes, exactly, and that’s why I add the internationalized, because we also have to hold the foreign actors like the UAE accountable in this context. But I don’t think we can absolve others. Both Burhan and Hemedti are war criminals, and we cannot absolve them of that long history of atrocities.

Media blackout as atrocities mounted

All Africa: As genocidal violence and famine spread and international humanitarian organizations have raised louder alarms, media coverage has increased somewhat – but during the years of civil protests that helped topple al-Bachir and the years afterwards, global attention has been sporadic. Has that affected developments in Sudan?

Dr. Elamin: There has been, in my view, a virtual media blackout. Now there’s a little bit more coverage of what’s happening, but it’s really too little, too late. There should have been a lot more focus on what is happening in order to put more pressure on the warring parties to agree to a ceasefire and corridors for humanitarian aid to come in.

There’s a lot of evidence that the UAE has been supporting the war from the very beginning. The RSF, after a 500-day siege, has taken control of the city of El-Fasher in North Darfur, the last stronghold of the army in western sudan. So this is a kind of major turning point in the war.

Over the course of 500 days, they’ve trapped people inside the city and cut off all s

Sudan’s War: Both Sides Are Culpable, Expert Says

Dr. Elamin: Neither warring party prioritizes Sudanese civilians. They both profit from this war, partnering with countries like the UAE and Egypt to extract Sudanese resources in exchange for weapons. This is a counter-revolutionary war designed to prevent civilian rule.

The army seized power in October 2021, derailing the transition to civilian rule. They aren’t innocent bystanders; the army has a history of war crimes in South Sudan and during the Darfur genocide in the 2000s.

Consider El-fasher. Rather of protecting people, the army negotiated its own withdrawal, leaving around 250,000 civilians trapped. They claim a lack of resources, but they’re better equipped to protect civilians than the civilians themselves.

They’ve weaponized hunger, cutting off supplies to RSF-controlled areas. In Darfur, the army bombed an IDP camp after a famine declaration to destroy evidence of the famine the UN had reported in North Darfur.

Currently,the RSF is committing more horrific war crimes in Darfur. Though, this doesn’t excuse the army’s past actions. I don’t consider either side legitimate.

The RSF is committing genocidal war crimes,and the Sudanese diaspora is right to call for international intervention to protect civilians.