On 30 June, soldiers of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)were preparing in their defensive positions in the city of Sinja to engage Rapid Support Forces (RSF) vehicles, which typically move fast towards their targets and attack them furiously.
The SAF soldiersheard a loud hummingfollowed by explosions, warning them that they were being attacked by suicide drones with other offensive drones dropping bombs near them to cause chaosand deny them the chance of using anti-drone systems.
The RSF vehicles then showed up, speeding up to penetrate the city’s defences andforcing SAF soldiers to retreat, while the Sudanese Air Force failed to engage themdue to anti-aircraft guns.
The RSF laterannounced on X that it had taken control of Sinja, enabling it to tighten the noose around Port Sudanon the Red Sea, which houses SAF and administrative centres.
The war in Sudan, currently in its 15th month, has causedmultiple political, economic, and humanitarian disasters for thecountry. Its citizens are suffering from the scourge of war without either of the parties being able to gain complete control of the fieldand instead leading thecountry down a dark tunnel.
Strategically, there are several reasons forthe continuation of the war, but one of the most significant is the Sudanese Army’s outdated arsenal. Despite the existence of local weapons manufacturing, the Sudanese army was unable to achieve a crushing victory at the start of the war due to its lack of advanced weapons, particularly armour and artillery as well as guided and smart ammunition.
The RSF adopted the unconventional strategyof relying on small, dispersed, and fast-moving forces attacking from different directions to create an element of surprise, followed by medium-range artillery fire. This allowed it to win battles in various cities before engaging in close-range fighting to evade the Sudanese Air Force’s strikes due to itsdifficulty in identifying targets.
The SAF has since demonstrated its adaptation by shifting its tactics from relying on heavy armoured forces manoeuvring at slow speed to faster methods, including the use of small offensive and suicide drones to deter the RSF before attacking them with artillery and tanks.
The fighting has been concentrated on major axes throughout the months of June and July.
In White Nile State, the RSF concentrated its forces in Jazira and Sennar, with the goal of breaking through to Al-Duaim, Naima, and Rabek in the centre of the state, which serves as the headquarters of Sudan’s 18th Army Division.
The RSF declared in July that they had taken control of the town of Sinja and a substantial portion of Sinnar. They are now threatening to establish a new front in the east by invading Gedaref from the west and southwest in an attempt to separate the White and Blue Nile States from the remainder of Sudan’s army-controlled territory.
The situation is complicated by the RSF’s control over the Jabal Moya area, which serves as the meeting point for the White and Blue Nile States. This has forced the SAF to send additional forces from the direction of Rabk to Sinnar to try to isolate and besiege the RSF in an attempt to stop advances on this front.
In Al-Fasher, a town with an advantageous location in North Darfur and the only destination for assistance convoys coming from Port Sudan, the siege lasted several months but in mid-Junethe SAF were able to intensify tactical raids by drones and artillery on the command headquarters of the RSF outside the city.
This led to the death of the RSF commander,the collapse of the RSF inside and outside the city, and the lifting of the siege. It is possible that the latter will be reapplied, but for the moment the RSF lack the combat momentum that theyused to control the Al-Merim area, resulting in full control of the Darfur region in the country’s west.
In the capital Khartoum, the desire to control the city led to a large concentration of the RSF. However, for the time being the SAF have prevented the RSF from taking control, and the battles there are limited to long-range artillery barrages between the parties, without any significant change in the situation.
A shift in the political situation was significantly influenced by the SAF victory at the Battle of Al-Fasher. The SAFannounced that it would not be participating in any further negotiations after the RSF attempted to impose terms that the SAF found unacceptable.
Meanwhile, the RSF’s gaining control of Sinja and Sinnar has led it to pile on the political pressure by attempting to control areas of vital infrastructure, such as humanitarian aiddistribution corridors, as well as areas of economic importance, such as the city of Fula, the capital of the oil-rich Kordofan State.
There have been major international efforts this month aiming at halting the military operations and trying to reach a political solution to the conflict. The most important has been Cairo’s hosting of a conference of the Sudanese political and civil parties, which stressed the need for an immediate end to the war, the stopping of all hostilities, and the need to adhere to the Jeddah Declaration to protect civilians signed by the SAF and the RSF in May.
Since the start of the military operations, Egypt has adopted a neutral position, keeping its distance from the parties with a view to finding the most suitable solution for the Sudanese people without any interference from external parties.
Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi has expressed this policy in the slogan “Sudan first,” the goal being to reach a viable political accord that respects Sudan’s sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, as well as the preservation of the state and its institutions. Heemphasised Egypt’s willingness to coordinate and collaborate with regional and international partners to resolve the Sudanese conflict at the conference on Sudan this month.
According to TV channel France 24, a UN spokeswoman told a media briefing this week that Ramtane Lamamra, personal envoy of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterresfor Sudan, had invited delegations from the SAF and the RSF for talks in Geneva focused on humanitarian aid and protecting civilians.
However, one side had not shown up for Thursday’s first day of discussions, she said, without identifying which party.
While various parties are working to reach an agreement to end the Sudanese war, the question is whether this will match the intentions of the fighting parties.Military events in June and July suggest a major expansion of the RSF, while the SAF is attempting to control the situation and increase its supplies.
The setting up of a new front in the east by the RSF indicates an intention to prolong the fighting, though this is not supported by Sudan’s citizens, who are suffering from increasing poverty and a lack of food and water. Approximately three million acres of agricultural land have been ruined as a result of fighting near the rich agricultural area ofSennar in the Darfur region and the collapse of irrigation networks in Kordofan.
Sudan’s economy has been badly damaged, with the value of the Sudanese pound falling significantly and inflation rates exceeding 500 percent. But these factors have not been important enough to cause the SAF or RSF to put an end to the war, with both being more interested in raising money to buy weapons or bring in foreign fighters to help them win the conflict.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 11 July, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: