Is Organising a Humanitarian Conference without CONSENT or Coordination with Sudan a Violation of its Sovereignty?

By: Tadjadine Bechir Niam

Of course, we all know that the main reason for establishing global organisations such as the United Nations( UN) and regional organisations such as the African Union(AU) is to maintain international peace and security for all members and to achieve the “fundamental freedoms for all.”

This is done without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion” [2] as stipulated in the UN Charter. Its rules and obligations are binding on all members and supersede those of other treaties.

Thus, the international community will promote “universal respect for, and observance of, state sovereignty.”

So, all states can establish relations with the international community and its organisations according to their interests and needs.

The UN charter prohibits violations of any state’s sovereignty and aggression from any state against others, especially the powerful states. Thus, any state is empowered to manage its internal, external, and other affairs by its own will without being bound by any other will.

The idea that some countries interfere in the internal affairs of other nations is an old phenomenon. It has been repeated in the history of international relations in cases of internal conflicts. But it has increased, especially among the powerful, developed countries over the developing countries in recent history. They usually claim that the idea of intervention came to protect people in the event of armed conflicts, in which the concerned state failed to protect its citizens, which is known as the principle of international humanitarian intervention.

One of the issues that preoccupied world public opinion in the modern era is the concept of intervention and protection for humanitarian considerations, especially after the adoption of the principle of “responsibility to protect” by the United Nations General Assembly in 2005, Which was held at the summit level (at the level of heads of state and government).

This acknowledgement sparked widespread controversy in the international arena, and this concession is the beginning of a new reality in which international relations are formed on an unprecedented manner. Several observers and political analysts have expressed their fears that this international humanitarian intervention will lead to an infringement on national sovereignty in light of the conflict between supporters of the rule of law rather than state sovereignty.

The shift in the balance of power in the international world system after the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, the impact of globalisation, the defeat of the Soviet Union, and the emergence of the United States of America and its Western allies made them the real decision makers and responsible for international peace and security as a superpower that dominates international relations.

The main strategies behind France and Germany’s organisation of the so-called “Humanitarian Conference” without consent or coordination with the Government of Sudan are unclear yet.

It is true that Rapid Support Forces (RSF) attacked, raped, looted and forced almost 18 million Sudanese into displacement and nearly one million to seek refuge aboard. Because of these practices, the RSF was dissolved, and its leader was sacked.

Many countries condemned the RSF as a violator of international Criminal Law, and called for the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) to come in and investigate those atrocities.

But still, France insisted on saying that there are “two parties”.

The Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a very strong statement on 12 April 2024, protesting on “convening the so-called Humanitarian Conference without its participation of or coordination with Sudan. The statement considered it not only a gross violation of its sovereignty, but it is a violation of the U N and AU charters, as well as a violation of international law and the principle of state sovereignty and independence”.

The statement added that “Sudan is maintaining good relations with many states worldwide, and has diplomatic representation including with France and Germany”.

The statement concluded that “It is true that Rapid Support Forces (RSF) attacked, raped, looted and forced almost 18 million Sudanese to displacement and almost one million to seek refuge aboard. Because of these practices, the RSF was dissolved and its leader was sacked. Many countries condemned them as violators of international Criminal Law and human rights and invited the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) to come in and investigate those atrocities. But still, France insisted that there are “two parties”.

The statement concluded by calling the participants to consider and abide by the above-mentioned principles, values, and understandings”.

The writer concludes that the principle of International Relations (IR) is based on the recognition of states, their independence, and national sovereignty. States are empowered to manage their internal, external, and other affairs without being bound by any other will.

The organisation of the Humanitarian Conference without consent or coordination with the Government of Sudan is a violation of its sovereignty.

Tadjadine Bechir Niam

Researcher in International Affairs and Human Security