Sudan War: Fighters Will Eventually Fall Silent, But Will Civilians Learn How to Disagree?

Sudanhorizon – Agencies

The Arabic Weekly newspaper published an analytical article by writer and political analyst Al-Fadil Ibrahim on October 6, titled: “Suumod Delegation Came to Washington to Talk About Peace, But Attendees Got Into a Fight.” The article strongly criticized the Sudanese opposition alliance, arguing that its latest tour of the United States had produced counterproductive results.

Fight Interrupts Suumod Meeting in Washington

The writer reviewed details of an event held by the leadership of the Suumod alliance, the civilian front led by former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, at a Washington hotel on the final Sunday of September. The event was held to discuss the alliance’s vision for peace and civilian transition with members of the Sudanese community.

Tensions erupted during the seminar when a young Sudanese man approached the panel and asked about the alliance’s position on the flow of weapons to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), whose war against the Sudanese Armed Forces has caused one of the world’s largest humanitarian and displacement crises. He concluded his remarks by raising the slogan: “One Army, One People.”

After leaving the stage, the young man was pushed, assaulted, and physically harassed near the exit, causing confusion and anger inside the hall. Alliance leaders attempted to contain the situation. Alliance spokesman Bakri Al-Jak said through the microphone: “We are civilians, and we are here to express our views.” Hamdok responded: “This is a typical example of the polarization we are experiencing. The essence of democracy lies in disagreement.” Outside, tensions escalated as supporters of the army gathered and shouted jeers and accusations of treason at members of the movement.

The article traced the formation of the Suumod alliance in February 2025 following a split within the Taqaddum movement, which resulted from disagreements over the RSF’s efforts to establish a parallel government. While Hamdok chose to maintain neutrality, a number of the movement’s leaders, including his former deputy Al-Hadi Idris, sided with the RSF, exposing the alliance to repeated accusations of “selling the blood of civilians” for political objectives.

Despite Hamdok’s repeated condemnation of violence by both sides and his calls for parallel efforts toward a truce, humanitarian assistance, and national dialogue, his position has faced a complex test on the ground, particularly following recent shifts on the battlefield, with the army making successive gains and tightening the pressure on the RSF in Darfur.

The writer also pointed to another gap in Suumod’s discourse, namely the alliance’s reluctance to name regional powers supporting the RSF, while focusing heavily on Iranian support for the army. Alliance leader Khalid Omar warned in several articles of the dangers of Iranian influence, urging the West to consider it a regional threat.

The article described this position as inconsistent with developments on the ground, noting that the Sudanese army has taken steps to distance itself from Iran and move closer to Gulf states, including joining the Saudi-led maritime coalition to protect navigation in the Red Sea.

The writer argued that the media campaign was primarily aimed at marketing the alliance in Washington as an acceptable civilian alternative and weakening the position of the internationally recognized army.

Realism of Initiatives and Activities in Washington

The article criticized the alliance’s proposals as lacking realism, arguing that they call on two sides engaged in an existential war to accept a ceasefire and undertake structural reforms. The writer said this approach has found acceptance in Western capitals as a way to avoid imposing genuine concessions on the armed parties.

The article also noted that Suumod rejected an initiative launched by Army Commander Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan in August to hold a “Sudanese-Sudanese” dialogue inside Sudan while granting conditional amnesty, arguing that areas under army control could not be considered neutral.

At the same time, the alliance delegation achieved a diplomatic breakthrough in Washington by holding meetings with US administration officials, including Massad Boulos, Senior Advisor to President Trump for African and Arab Affairs; Mike Waltz, the US Ambassador to the United Nations; and Frank Garcia, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. The meetings, according to the article, reflect growing US pressure toward imposing a comprehensive arms embargo on Sudan.

Lobbying Activities and Sources of Funding

Citing documents filed under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and reporting by Radio Tamazuj, the article revealed that Suumod had contracted Washington-based consulting firm Global Point International for $160,000 through February 2027 to represent the alliance before US institutions. The first payment of $80,000 was reportedly transferred through an entity registered in Nairobi under the name Dabaia Media Network Limited.

The writer stressed that the alliance should transparently disclose the sources of funding for its political activities as long as it presents itself as a voice representing the aspirations of the Sudanese people.

The writer concluded that the Washington altercation reflects a deep inability among Sudanese parties to manage differences and a tendency to silence opposing voices.

He stressed that, eventually, the fighters will stop shooting and the war will end. But if civilians do not learn how to disagree peacefully without resorting to force, Sudan’s prospects for achieving stability and prosperity will remain extremely limited.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=18736