Face of Truth | Ibrahim Shaglawi
Sudan: Who Drinks the Poison and Who Reaps the Fruits?
Since the outbreak of war between the army and the Rapid Support Militia, Sudan has been living under a state of political abduction whose features are drawn beyond its borders. Settlements are being imposed that do not reflect its will but rather the desires of coup leaders and their supporters seeking to shape influence within the country and across the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea.
Egypt’s position yesterday was clear as usual, through Foreign Minister Badr Abdel Aaty’s communications with several Western capitals and with Masad Boulos, Senior Advisor to the U.S. President for Arab and African Affairs, affirming the necessity of a ceasefire and the preservation of Sudan’s unity and national institutions.
However, these calls have not translated into practical steps to end the tragedy. Instead, they appeared as a political cover for managing the crisis rather than resolving it. While Washington and London spoke of “humanitarian protection,” the Rapid Support Militia was committing atrocities in Darfur following its control of El-Fasher, after horrific massacres against civilians that revived images of medieval ethnic cleansing.
The reality on the ground does not reflect the image promoted by some media outlets and international organizations supporting the militia. The Sudanese army still controls most of the country’s territory—in the north, east, center, and the capital Khartoum—while the militia’s control remains limited to Darfur and some cities in Kordofan.
Nevertheless, regional and international powers, through what is called the “roadmap,” are attempting to impose a settlement that equates the state with the militia—those who defend the homeland with those who work to dismantle it. It is a roadmap presented in a humanitarian guise, but in essence, it is a political settlement that undermines national sovereignty. For this reason, the Sudanese people rejected it, for accepting it would mean rewarding crime and legitimizing the project of dividing the state.
Still, the international community continues its usual double standards: condemning the militia’s violations verbally while allowing it in practice to continue its genocidal war.
U.S. officials have called on the militia to protect civilians and open humanitarian corridors, yet they have not imposed sanctions nor designated it as a terrorist organization despite recommendations from Congress and the Senate. As for regional organizations, they have succumbed to the calculations of money and influence; neither the Arab League nor the African Union has been able to take a position commensurate with the scale of the catastrophe. Thus, the war in Sudan has become a mirror of global hypocrisy and political and moral impotence.
In the face of this reality, Sudan cannot afford the luxury of waiting. The war is no longer a mere military conflict but a battle over the identity of the state and its place in the world. The solution will not come from outside but from within, through a comprehensive national project.
Overcoming the impasse begins when Sudan rebuilds its national decision-making center through a national council of wise figures, with the participation of civil society forces, to unify military and political leadership under one vision aimed at restoring the state—not dividing it—and achieving peace on national terms, not those of the militias or their sponsors.
Sudan must move from a position of reaction to a position of action. It must present its own vision for a solution, free from regional and international blackmail, revive its old friendships and leverage its pressure cards, and call on others to support its national initiative rather than be dragged to humiliating negotiation tables.
Ending the war will not come through reproducing chaos, but by holding accountable those who committed crimes and working earnestly to unify the national ranks behind the state institutions.
What Sudan needs today is a national peace initiative led by Sudanese hands—one that places justice first, restores trust between regions and the center, and opens the path for a disciplined transition that preserves the state’s sovereignty and rebuilds it on the foundations of justice and citizenship.
This vision cannot be complete without redefining Sudan’s foreign policy. The balance between East and West is no longer viable in a phase where the West seeks to mature its vision of dividing Sudan and exploiting its resources. Sudan must broaden its relations with Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia to secure political and economic support and build strategic partnerships with Russia and China to preserve the independence of its decisions in the Security Council and its development projects.
Overcoming the Sudanese crisis will not be complete without a project to rebuild the social contract. The war has exposed the fragility of the collective identity and deepened wounds between regions. Therefore, genuine reconciliation must be based on acknowledgment of crimes, accountability for perpetrators, fair redistribution of resources, and the revival of the idea of a united, diverse Sudan—bound by shared destiny before language, and identity before ethnicity.
This is the greatest challenge: for the state to regain its meaning, and for every Sudanese to feel that he has a place within it, that he is obliged to protect it and support its army.
Despite the harshness and duration of the war, Sudan has not been defeated. It still possesses immense national capital, a cohesive army, and a people who have begun to realize that the struggle is no longer between civilians and the military but between the state and non-state forces.
This moment grants Sudan a historic opportunity to write its destiny with its own hands and impose its peace on the terms of dignity and sovereignty, not on the terms of outsiders. Today, Sudan drinks the poison on behalf of the entire region—the poison of interventions, the greed for its resources, and the militias used to dismantle the state. But those reaping the fruits are the ones who ignited the fire and sat down to divide the spoils. Yet, this equation is not an inevitable fate.
When Sudan regains its decision, strengthens its alliances, and formulates its national project, it will become the one to plant the idea and reap its fruits. Then all will realize that the blood shed was not in vain but a seed for the birth of a new Sudanese state—one that is neither sold nor rented, but built through will, awareness, and dignity.
Peace and wellness to you all.
Thursday, October 30, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com
