Sudan's Conflict Is Seemingly Endless
Sudan has faced cycles of civil war, genocide, and political upheaval since gaining its independence in 1956. Drawing lessons from Ethiopia’s 1995 constitution, Sudan could potentially find a path to stability by addressing its ethnic and resource-driven conflicts.
After the Second Sudanese Civil War (1983–2005), this nation was separated into two countries: Sudan and South Sudan.
This split was largely fueled by religious, ethnic, and resource-based grievances between the Arab-Muslim north and the predominantly Christian and animist south.
In this national divorce, South Sudan took control of approximately 75% of the country’s oil reserves. South Sudan is dependent on Sudan for access to Port Sudan for its oil exports through two pipelines.
Since the outbreak of Sudan's civil war in 2023, approximately 150,000 people have lost their lives.
Sudan has a population of 49.2 million, with approximately 70% of its people identifying as Arabs. The African groups in this country have historically been marginalized.
In the past, Sudan has had a few resource-driven conflicts between Arab and African groups. For example in 2011, a war broke out in South Kordofan, between the Sudanese government and the local African Nuba peoples because this region is rich in oil.
The fighting between the government and the rebels in South Kordofan and Blue Nile continued until 2020.
From 2003 to 2008, Arab militia groups, known as the Janjaweed, carried out a genocide in Darfur. They killed approximately 300,000 people and displaced 2.7 million from their homes.
Janjaweed means "Devils on Horseback" in Arabic. The victims of the Darfur genocide were the African ethnic groups, mainly the Fur, Zaghawa, and Masalit peoples
Today, the remnants of the Janjaweed have evolved into the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) under the leadership of Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo.
In 2019, the ousting of Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir, who ruled for three decades, created a power vacuum. In 2023, Sudan was plunged into another civil war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
The RSF became an even greater threat to the Sudanese military when they seized control of gold mines in Darfur. The RSF is funded by gold exports.
The United States needs to expand its efforts to stop countries from buying Sudanese gold from the RSF and intensify pressure on the RSF’s allies in the United Arab Emirates to curb gold smuggling out of Sudan.
After we defund the RSF, we can negotiate an end to the conflict.
According to the Congressional Research Service, "The war has pushed over 12 million people from their homes. More than half the population, over 25 million people, reportedly face acute food insecurity, and famine is spreading."
According to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the RSF is committing genocide in Darfur.
The RSF cannot be allowed to win this war.
After this civil war ends, Sudan needs to address its internal issues by adopting a federal system to promote cooperation among its diverse population. Ethiopia’s 1995 constitution established an ethnic federal system, which can provide some instructive lessons for Sudan.
Ethiopia is a nation of over 116 million people. The largest ethnic groups are the Oromo (35.8%), Amhara (24.1%), Somali (7.2%) and Tigray (5.7%).
The Amhara dominated Ethiopia under Haile Selassie’s regime (1916-1974) and the communist regime (1974-1991) led by Mengistu Haile Mariam.
It has been estimated that as many as one million Ethiopians died during the famine of the 1980s. The tragic combination of famines, the Red Terror during the communist regime, and wars with Eritrea and Somalia, encouraged Ethiopians to eventually adopt federalism.
When the 1995 constitution was adopted, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, a Tigrayan leader, sought to downplay ethnic differences through power-sharing and federalism. It didn’t resolve Ethiopia’s tensions, because these regional groups were subservient to his political party.
Since 2018, Abiy Ahmed, the country’s first Oromo leader, has worsened ethnic tensions, especially in the Tigray conflict (2020-2022). In 2019, Mahmood Mamdani, the Herbert Lehman Professor of Government at Columbia University, wrote:
“Mr. Abiy can achieve real progress if Ethiopia embraces a different kind of federation — territorial and not ethnic — where rights in a federal unit are dispensed not on the basis of ethnicity but on residence.”
Territorial federalism is necessary for both Ethiopia and Sudan. Sudan faces both internal challenges and a significant water dispute with Ethiopia.
The United States could host the leaders of Ethiopia, Sudan, and Egypt to negotiate an agreement.
Sudan’s future hinges on tackling the deep-seated causes of its conflicts. Just as Ethiopia underwent transformation in 1995, real change in Sudan will come when people from all backgrounds unite and demand lasting peace.
Without broad-based support from the public for territorial federalism, Sudan will never end this conflict.
(Editor's Note: The author of this column would like to acknowledge friend and former Professor in African Politics, Dr. Claude Welch, for useful background on Sudan and Ethiopia's history. He granted permission twice to be interviewed, by the author of this column. Dr. Welch's background encompasses the role of the armed forces in politics and human rights.)
Robert Zapesochny is a researcher and writer whose work focuses on foreign affairs, national security and presidential history. He has been published in numerous outlets, including The American Spectator, the Washington Times, and The American Conservative. When he's not writing, Robert works for a medical research company in New York. Read Robert Zapesochny's Reports — More Here.