In Sudan’s civil war, two regional powers, Egypt and the UAE, are backing opposing factions, the SAF and RSF respectively. While Egypt sees the SAF as vital for regional stability and managing refugee crises, the UAE aims to exploit Sudan’s resources through the RSF. This conflict has broader implications for security and humanitarian conditions in the region, prompting U.S. sanctions and calls for diplomatic mediation.
In the midst of Sudan’s ongoing civil war, a significant power struggle is occurring between Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Egypt, aligned with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), contrasts sharply with the UAE’s support for the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The violence, which erupted on April 15, 2023, has led to a severe humanitarian crisis and a near-collapse of the state.
The Biden administration recently imposed sanctions on both RSF leader Hemedti and SAF General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan for their roles in exacerbating the conflict and obstructing peace efforts. Despite damning evidence highlighting the UAE’s involvement with the RSF, the partnership has maintained a facade of neutrality on humanitarian grounds, a claim challenged by officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Egypt’s visible support for the SAF was underscored by Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty’s statements emphasizing the need to view the Sudanese army distinctly from other factions. This commitment to bolster Sudan’s military capabilities has included strengthening ties with neighboring countries like Eritrea and Somalia. However, the regional alignment has placed Egypt and the UAE at opposite ends of the conflict despite their historical collaboration.
President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt has relied heavily on Gulf support following the military’s displacement of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013, with the UAE offering substantial investment opportunities. Still, Egypt’s fundamental interests in Sudan diverge sharply from the UAE’s objectives. Egypt views the SAF as essential for maintaining stability, particularly in managing a burgeoning refugee crisis stemming from Sudan.
The potential influx of refugees poses an existential challenge for Egypt, which has already received more than 1.2 million Sudanese since April. Additionally, water security regarding the Nile River exacerbates these challenges. Egypt’s longstanding alliances with Sudan are further threatened by Ethiopia’s advancements regarding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, heightening Cairo’s sense of urgency.
With Sudan embroiled in civil war, upstream Nile countries have capitalized on Egypt’s weakened position, initiating new agreements that undermine previous treaties favoring Egypt and Sudan. In response, Egypt has sought to build a security alliance with Somalia and Eritrea to counter growing threats. This partnership is also intended to support efforts against potential terrorist activities within Sudan.
The UAE’s ambitions in Sudan have been hampered by the RSF’s inability to gain control, particularly regarding economic endeavors tied to the gold trade and the development of strategic ports. As the conflict continues, Sudan has annulled key agreements with the UAE, jeopardizing Abu Dhabi’s aspirations in the region.
Divergent interests have emerged, with Egypt favoring the military as the backbone of Sudan’s governance while the UAE pursues resource extraction through the RSF. Recognizing the need for dialogue, the army-led Sudanese government is open to negotiations with the UAE contingent upon the cessation of support for the RSF.
The ongoing conflict has strategic repercussions for both nations. Egypt’s position allows it to help bridge the gap between Sudan’s expectations and the UAE’s narrative. This development presents the opportunity for both Cairo and Abu Dhabi to seek a ceasefire, fostering stability in Sudan as well as improving regional dynamics.
This crisis highlights the necessity for U.S. intervention in mediating discussions between Egypt and the UAE. Encouraging collaboration between these allies may stave off deeper entrenchment in the conflict, which would only exacerbate the humanitarian disaster within Sudan.
This article discusses the geopolitical dynamics in Sudan amidst a civil war marked by a hidden struggle between Egypt and the UAE. Egypt supports the Sudanese military forces while the UAE backs a rival paramilitary faction. The conflict has exacerbated a humanitarian crisis, prompting sanctions from the U.S., which scrutinizes the involvement of both nations. The piece also examines the implications for regional security, water sovereignty, and economic interests in the Horn of Africa.
The ongoing civil conflict in Sudan reflects a complex power struggle between Egypt and the UAE, with both countries seeking to bolster their regional influence. While Egypt prioritizes stability and military backing, the UAE has pursued resource extraction goals through the RSF. The humanitarian crisis necessitates coordinated efforts for peace but also reveals the challenges of external involvement in internal conflicts. Thus, the path to stability in Sudan requires dialogue and reconciliation between both powers, alongside diplomatic support from the U.S.
Original Source: responsiblestatecraft.org
