Middle Eastern Monarchies in Sudan’s War: Motivations and Impacts

The civil war in Sudan, beginning April 2023, has drawn in external actors, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who are accused of supporting warring factions. Political scientist Federico Donelli analyzes their involvement, suggesting that internal factors have been compounded by these monarchies’ strategic interests. The geopolitical significance of Sudan, coupled with its agricultural potential, makes it vital for Gulf states. The conflict remains difficult to resolve due to the clashing goals of local actors and external support.

The civil war in Sudan, which commenced in April 2023, has drawn in several external actors, leading to a dire humanitarian crisis. The conflict primarily involves the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, and various countries, including Chad, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, have taken sides. Notably, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have allegedly provided support to these factions, despite their public denials.

Political scientist Federico Donelli explores the factors driving the involvement of the UAE and Saudi Arabia in Sudan’s civil conflict. While domestic conditions were the initial triggers for the war, it is essential to recognize the indirect roles played by external nations, particularly the Gulf monarchies over the past two decades. These monarchies, notably Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have a history of interactions with Sudan, often framed within their broader regional ambitions.

The connection between Saudi Arabia and Sudan dates back to Sudan’s independence in 1956, with enduring cultural ties due to geographical proximity. In contrast, the UAE’s influence surged in Africa during the early 2000s, focusing on economic ventures such as port logistics, with Sudan becoming a key interest following the Arab uprisings in the 2010s. Following President Omar al-Bashir’s tenure from 2014 to 2015, both monarchies sought to counteract Iran’s influence and supported military efforts in Yemen, fostering strong ties with Sudanese military forces.

Since the ousting of al-Bashir in 2019, Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s influence has persisted, as both monarchies are eager to cement their status amid shifting international dynamics. Their support for competing factions within Sudan exacerbated internal tensions; Riyadh has aligned with army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, while Abu Dhabi supports Rapid Support Forces leader Mohamed Dagalo, known as Hemedti. Although their interests diverged post-2019, with differing stances on political Islam, both monarchies remained reluctant to withdraw support once conflict erupted, fearing vulnerability.

Sudan’s significance to the Gulf states can be attributed to both the evolving regional power structure and its strategic location in the Horn of Africa. Increasing instability in the region following the US pivot to Asia prompted both countries to establish stronger ties with African nations, specifically Sudan. The two Gulf monarchies actively invested in Sudan and utilized a combination of military and political strategies to solidify their presence.

In the aftermath of the Arab uprisings, the UAE rapidly expanded its influence in Sudan amidst fears of unrest spilling over from Egypt. Conversely, Saudi Arabia’s influence remained consistent during this period, despite its concerns regarding regional instability. Following al-Bashir’s removal, the approaches of the two states began to diverge, particularly regarding their responses to Turkish and Qatari alliances in Sudan.

Sudan’s geographic position as a link between the Sahel and the Red Sea renders it vital for addressing regional challenges such as political turmoil, food insecurity, and security threats. It also plays an essential role in food security strategies, with notable investments from the Gulf in Sudan’s agriculture sector attributable to its fertile land and water resources.

The conflict in Sudan is expected to remain unresolved due to both parties’ commitment to absolute victory over the other, limiting prospects for compromise. Additionally, the ongoing international uncertainties provide external support avenues for both factions, complicating potential peace negotiations. The enduring division reflects two centers of governance and power, which are likely to become increasingly pronounced as the conflict persists.

In conclusion, the civil war in Sudan has attracted significant interest and involvement from Middle Eastern monarchies, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE. While internal dynamics initially triggered the conflict, the influence of these Gulf states has intensified amid shifting regional power structures. Their strategic interests in Sudan, combined with investments and military support, have exacerbated internal divisions, complicating efforts toward resolution. The ongoing struggle is likely to continue as external factors further entrench the competing factions.

Original Source: www.inkl.com