Al Jazeera Net correspondents
Khartoum- The clock of war determines the timing and directions of Sudan’s foreign relations in the wake of the fighting that broke out in mid-April between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces. Regional and international movements in the Sudanese crisis highlighted the role of external forces, making the balance of the war on the ground swing between the two warring parties.
The reality of the war led to a new map in Sudan’s foreign relations. A diplomatic crisis began with both the UAE and Chad, as Sudan ordered 15 Emirati diplomats to leave its territory after the UAE government asked the Sudanese ambassador, the military attaché, his deputy, and the cultural attaché to leave its territory.
Chad also summoned the Sudanese ambassador and demanded an apology within 72 hours for statements made by the Assistant Commander-in-Chief of the Sudanese Army, Yasser Al-Atta, in which he accused the UAE of supplying Rapid Support with weapons through airports in Chad, Central Africa, and Uganda.
Relations with the neighbourhood
Political analyst Muhammad Abbas believes that, according to the idea of international relations being based on mutual interests, the war has a direct impact on neighboring countries and the region, as the impact is due to the nature of the relationship of these countries with the decision-making centers within the country before the war.
Abbas told Al Jazeera Net that Egypt has a historical relationship with Sudan and its military institution, so the relationship witnessed a noticeable improvement during the war. As for countries such as South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Kenya, as influential countries in the Intergovernmental Authority for the Development of East African Countries (IGAD), they continued to deal with the crisis with great objectivity, which made the positions of both parties to the conflict fluctuate, indicating that this is due to the awareness of these countries. The nature of the conflict and the balance of power in it.
In the case of Chad, the matter seems more complicated, according to Muhammad Abbas, and he believes that this is due to the nature of the regional parties and their indirect dealing with the crisis in Sudan.
The Sudanese government’s recent public diplomatic escalation was preceded by its rejection of Kenya’s presidency of the Quartet, accusing its president, William Ruto, of supporting Rapid Support Commander Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti”, and requesting that the committee be headed by South Sudanese President Salva Kiir Mayardit, while threatening to withdraw from IGAD, if change is not made. Presidency of Kenya.
Aside from Sudan’s neighboring countries, last October, the Sudanese Foreign Ministry accused Britain and unnamed Western countries of adopting a political and media campaign and presenting a draft fact-finding commission in Sudan to the Human Rights Council, declaring its rejection of the draft resolution and its description of what is happening in Sudan.
Attempts to strengthen relationships
On the other hand, and within the framework of the compass of the Sudanese government’s directions imposed by the repercussions of the war, the Sudanese Foreign Ministry announced on the ninth of last October the resumption of diplomatic relations with Iran. This announcement comes after a rupture that lasted 7 years.
Sudan also strengthened its relations with Türkiye. Following the visit of the head of the Sovereignty Council, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, last September, he agreed with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to activate joint agreements, which included – according to sources – economic and military aspects, and post-war reconstruction.
The strategic relationship with Egypt and South Sudan as countries concerned with the repercussions of the Sudanese crisis has gained an additional dimension, as the Sudanese government believes that South Sudan is the best country authorized to mediate regarding the conflict in the country, while Cairo hosted the summit of Sudan’s neighboring countries on July 13 last.
Sudanese relations declined
The former director of the Peace Research Institute, Manzoul Asal, believes that the war has had a clear negative impact on Sudan’s foreign relations. Speaking to Al Jazeera Net, he said, “Sudan is rapidly losing its foreign relations with the UAE and Chad, in addition to its crisis with IGAD following the emergency summit on December 9, while it has maintained good relations with Egypt and Saudi Arabia.”
Assal added, “Sudan, as a country, has the right to object to the movements of any country it deems involved in providing supplies for rapid support, but the best way is to submit a complaint to the Security Council according to the evidence proving the involvement of specific countries.”
For his part, researcher and academic Hassan Al-Nasser said, “The war greatly affects the relationship of any country with the other, based on the intersections and interests on which the war was based, and not every war in Sudan’s history was devoid of external divisions.”
Al-Nasser told Al Jazeera Net, “The war divided the external actors, but not in a precise and equal way, meaning that there is a party – and I mean Rapid Support – that has an external ally that supports it openly, provides it with supplies clearly, and facilitates logistical support for it, while there is another party, and all of its allies cannot.” Even appearing and announcing their position clearly, especially since there is an ongoing attack and pressure being exerted on him to accept any political solution.”
The researcher says, “The government, represented by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, will seek to find a way out of this impasse by adopting fierce diplomacy, so that it is more stringent from the beginning of the crisis towards all countries that cooperate with and support the rebellion. This is, of course, a fait accompli policy that cannot be escaped from.”
Speaking to Al Jazeera Net, Al-Nasser believes that “the Foreign Ministry’s directions after the war must be based on drying up conflicts with these countries, by establishing good relations with the regimes and the opposition as well, and the Foreign Ministry must seek new and clear strategies based first on restoring Sudan’s role, and then Then establishing diplomatic relations with everyone according to the importance of Sudan’s position and ability as well, but this strategy is absent in diplomatic movements.”
