Wracked by war for two-and-a-half years, Sudan lies in ruins. Half a dozen peace initiatives have failed, none of them able to pressure or persuade regional powerbrokers to push for a compromise. Many Sudanese ask if the world cares whether they live or die. Could that be about to change with direct intervention from the Oval Office?
By US President Donald Trump's own admission, the conflict was not on his 'charts to be involved in that. I thought it was just something that was crazy and out of control.' But that was before a White House meeting 10 days ago with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who briefed the president on the situation and asked for intervention.
Trump stated, 'We're going to start working on Sudan,' followed by alarming reports from the region. He indicated that 'tremendous atrocities are taking place,' pledging to collaborate with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE to end the violence.
The United States has already been involved in negotiations, yet Trump's leverage might significantly impact the situation, especially with nearly 12 million people displaced and persistent famine. Recent escalations, including the takeover of el-Fasher by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), further exacerbate the humanitarian crisis.
Reports highlight significant atrocities committed by the RSF, including mass killings and rapes, with video evidence circulating online. With on-the-ground leaders showing little willingness for compromise, Trump's involvement could alter the dynamics.
Previous attempts at peace talks have been undermined by conflicting interests among regional powers supporting different factions. The UAE's alleged supply of arms to the RSF complicates the situation further. For any prospect of peace, key regional states must cease operations fueling the conflict.
Trump’s administration, through the 'Quad' coalition involving Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the U.S., has outlined a plan centered around a ceasefire, humanitarian aid access, and civilian-led governance negotiations.
While the potential for peace exists, the nuances of regional politics, the entrenched positions of Sudanese military leaders, and existing humanitarian needs cast long shadows over any hopeful prospects. As the Sudanese population waits, uncertainty looms over whether meaningful action will emerge from the renewed U.S. interest.
By US President Donald Trump's own admission, the conflict was not on his 'charts to be involved in that. I thought it was just something that was crazy and out of control.' But that was before a White House meeting 10 days ago with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who briefed the president on the situation and asked for intervention.
Trump stated, 'We're going to start working on Sudan,' followed by alarming reports from the region. He indicated that 'tremendous atrocities are taking place,' pledging to collaborate with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE to end the violence.
The United States has already been involved in negotiations, yet Trump's leverage might significantly impact the situation, especially with nearly 12 million people displaced and persistent famine. Recent escalations, including the takeover of el-Fasher by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), further exacerbate the humanitarian crisis.
Reports highlight significant atrocities committed by the RSF, including mass killings and rapes, with video evidence circulating online. With on-the-ground leaders showing little willingness for compromise, Trump's involvement could alter the dynamics.
Previous attempts at peace talks have been undermined by conflicting interests among regional powers supporting different factions. The UAE's alleged supply of arms to the RSF complicates the situation further. For any prospect of peace, key regional states must cease operations fueling the conflict.
Trump’s administration, through the 'Quad' coalition involving Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the U.S., has outlined a plan centered around a ceasefire, humanitarian aid access, and civilian-led governance negotiations.
While the potential for peace exists, the nuances of regional politics, the entrenched positions of Sudanese military leaders, and existing humanitarian needs cast long shadows over any hopeful prospects. As the Sudanese population waits, uncertainty looms over whether meaningful action will emerge from the renewed U.S. interest.
