Middle Eastern Monarchies in Sudan’s Civil War: Impacts and Interests

The civil war in Sudan has emerged with significant foreign involvement, particularly from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who provide support to rival factions. Historical ties and geopolitical interests drive their actions in the region, leading to increased instability and humanitarian crises. Despite pressures for negotiation, achieving peace remains complicated by entrenched local and regional dynamics.

The civil war in Sudan, which began in April 2023, has drawn involvement from several external actors, creating significant humanitarian crises. The primary conflict exists between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, with various foreign states such as Chad, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE choosing sides. Notably, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have reportedly provided both military and financial support, although they have publicly denied such claims.

The UAE and Saudi Arabia’s engagement stems from a history of political relations dating back to Sudan’s independence in 1956. With Sudan’s geographical proximity to Saudi Arabia, as well as close religious ties, it became a focal point for foreign investment and influence. The UAE expanded its footprint in Africa and increased its investments in Sudan, particularly in the logistics and agricultural sectors.

In the wake of President Omar al-Bashir’s regime from 2014 to 2015, Saudi and UAE influence significantly increased. The desire to counter Iranian presence in the Red Sea culminated in Sudan providing military support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen. As Sudan transitioned to a new political landscape in 2019, both Gulf monarchies sought to influence the country’s future, aligning with different factions within Sudan’s military, which escalated internal conflicts.

Since 2019, a shift has occurred in the relationship between the UAE and Saudi Arabia, moving from strong alignment to diverging stances on political issues, especially regarding political Islam. Although the conflict in Sudan was not ignited by this divergence, local actors were emboldened by perceived external backing, leading to increased hostilities.

Several factors contribute to the Gulf states’ strategic interests in Sudan. The shifts in regional power dynamics prompted both countries to reinforce their presence in Sudan following the Arab uprisings, with military and political interactions growing considerably. Despite early mutual concerns surrounding political instability, the UAE’s influence grew swiftly compared to Saudi Arabia’s steadier approach during this period.

Sudan’s location between the Sahel and the Red Sea enhances its significance, facing multifaceted challenges including political instability, conflict, and food insecurity. The Gulf monarchies particularly aim to tap into Sudan’s fertile lands and agricultural resources to better secure their food supplies, investing substantial sums into the agri-food sector.

Given the current climate, resolving the conflict in Sudan through negotiation appears increasingly challenging. Both factions are entrenched in their positions, perceiving victory as contingent upon the other’s defeat, leaving little scope for compromise. Furthermore, external support from various global powers complicates the path toward peace, leading to a dual governance structure that is likely to solidify further in the future.

The conflict in Sudan underscores a complex interplay of internal and external dynamics, with Gulf monarchies such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE playing pivotal roles. Their historical ties and strategic interests have made Sudan a focal point for influence in the Horn of Africa, reflecting broader regional power shifts. Consequently, the prospects for a peaceful resolution remain tenuous amidst entrenched hostilities exacerbated by foreign involvement.

Original Source: www.inkl.com