The Era of Proxies Is Over: The US Recalibrates Its Compass and Europe Follows

Dr Mohamed Yousif Hassan
Facts impose their own logic, and this explains the remarkable shift in the West’s approach towards Sudan during June 2026. Five simultaneous developments suggest that the era of external political engineering has come to an end, giving way to a new phase of American realism that Europe appears to be following step by step.
First: Washington Withdraws the Weapon of “Delegitimisation”
On 12 June, the United States Congress dropped a provision challenging the legitimacy of Sudan’s representation at the United Nations. This provision had been a key instrument used by the Quartet and Quintet groups in attempts to politically isolate the Government of Sudan in favour of a proposed “civilian alternative”.
Its removal represents a sovereign American decision and signals the end of that strategy. Legitimacy, in Washington’s eyes, now appears to belong to those governing the state from Khartoum rather than those operating from offices in Nairobi.
Second: Europe Follows Washington and Visits Khartoum
On 15 June, a delegation of European ambassadors arrived in Khartoum and met the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council and Commander-in-Chief of the Sudanese Armed Forces.
The statement issued after the meeting did not invoke the familiar language of “restoring the democratic transition” in its previous form, nor did it call for Hamdok’s return. Instead, it spoke only of “an inclusive political process that excludes no one”.
Europe does not lead; it follows.
The visit came after the American decision and should be viewed as an exercise in risk management rather than an expression of an independent European policy.
Third: Marc Botenga Publicly Criticises Abu Dhabi
Belgian Member of the European Parliament and Vice-President of the European Left, Marc Botenga, openly criticised the UAE’s role in Sudan’s war and opposed the reception of an Emirati delegation at the European Parliament.
For years, Europe benefited from Emirati resources in advancing its regional agenda. Today, however, support for the Rapid Support Forces has become a liability, threatening broader European interests in the Red Sea.
The message is clear: “We do not wish to sink alongside your proxies.”
Fourth: Brussels Receives the Governor of Darfur and Sudan’s Ambassador
A recent meeting at the headquarters of the European Union in Brussels between the Governor of Darfur, Sudan’s Ambassador to the EU, and Annette Weber, the European Union’s Special Representative for the Horn of Africa, may be the most significant development of all.
Why?
1. The Location
The meeting took place in Brussels—the centre of European decision-making—not in Khartoum.
2. The Level of Representation
The EU Special Representative for the Horn of Africa is at the forefront of European policy in the region.
3. The Sudanese Participants
The participation of the Governor of Darfur alongside Sudan’s ambassador amounts to recognition of Sudan’s existing state institutions.
The era of treating exiled activists as the principal representatives of Sudan appears to be drawing to a close.
The meeting signals a shift in European policy from attempting to contain Sudan from afar to engaging with Sudan’s state institutions directly. It effectively legitimises dealings with the Government of Sudan at a regional level.
Fifth: Western Capitals Open Dialogue with Islamists
Multiple reports indicate that discussions have taken place in London, Brussels, and Washington with Sudanese Islamists.
Western policymakers have come to realise that isolating Islamist actors risks driving them further towards Iran and Russia. Consequently, policy appears to be shifting from exclusion to containment.
Keeping them within the political process is viewed as less costly than transforming them into fully fledged adversaries.
Why Now? The American-Iranian Understanding Is the Key
All five developments followed the announcement of the American-Iranian Memorandum of Understanding and the 60-day ceasefire declared on 10 June.
Washington is preparing the ground, while Europe is positioning itself for the possible outcomes.
If the Agreement Succeeds
Iranian support for the Sudanese military may diminish. The United States and Europe both seek a stable Sudan. Consequently, they recognise the Government of Sudan while simultaneously attempting to engage all relevant actors.
The meeting with Annette Weber lays the foundation for this path.
If the Agreement Fails
Sudan could become a new arena for proxy confrontation.
The West seeks to maintain open channels with the Government of Sudan to prevent Khartoum from moving entirely into the Tehran–Moscow–Beijing axis.
For this reason, bridges are now being built in both Khartoum and Darfur.
In either scenario, the Red Sea matters more than Hamdok.
Strategic maritime routes matter more than political slogans.
The Collapse of the “Islamist Army versus Civilian RSF” Narrative
For three years, Hamdok’s political camp promoted the narrative that the conflict was essentially a struggle between an Islamist military establishment and a more legitimate civilian alternative.
The war exposed the weaknesses of that narrative.
The Rapid Support Forces committed serious abuses while many within that political camp continued to justify or excuse them.
The result was a loss of support among Sudanese public opinion and growing discomfort among Western governments with such a one-dimensional interpretation.
The congressional decision and the reception of the Governor of Darfur in Brussels amount, in the author’s view, to the formal burial of the project of an “alternative civilian legitimacy”.
What Happens After the 60 Days?
Scenario One: The American-Iranian Ceasefire Holds
The United States adopts containment as a long-term policy, while Europe fully normalises relations with the Government of Sudan.
The Weber meetings evolve into a permanent joint mechanism.
The UAE comes under pressure to reduce support for the RSF as American and European political cover is withdrawn.
Scenario Two: The Ceasefire Collapses
Washington returns to bloc politics, and Europe immediately follows.
Isolation policies return.
Brussels suspends engagement.
The narrative of the “Islamist Army” is revived.
The UAE once again assumes a central proxy role.
Conclusion: A New Western Realism
There is no independent and balanced European reading of Sudan, the author argues. There is one American reading, and Europe translates it into its own diplomatic language.
The meeting between Annette Weber, the Governor of Darfur, and Sudan’s ambassador represents the practical implementation of the congressional decision. It serves as Europe’s stamp of approval on a broader American recalibration.
According to this reading, the West is now signalling the end of the proxy-war paradigm. It is telling the UAE: “We will not fight your battles.” It is telling Hamdok: “We will not impose you.” And it is telling the Government of Sudan: “We deal with you because you represent the reality on the ground.”
The coming sixty days will not only test Iran. They will also test whether the West has finally learned that money cannot buy nations, that international platforms cannot manufacture legitimacy, and that whoever governs Khartoum ultimately holds Sudan’s recognised political authority.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=15016