The recent scenes of “flagrant violations” committed by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia in the city of Al-Fasher, North Darfur, have reignited global attention to a conflict that, for months, seemed to have been relegated to the status of a “forgotten war” amid the world’s preoccupation with Gaza.
The humanitarian situation in Al-Fasher is but the latest episode in a long series of atrocities that have marked Sudan’s descent into chaos since fighting erupted in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF militia.
The country now faces one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises. United Nations figures estimate that nearly 15 million people are displaced, both internally and externally, and warn that famine threatens 25 million more.
The fall of Al-Fasher
The capture of Al-Fasher by the RSF marks a dramatic shift in Sudan’s military and political landscape.
Earlier this year, the Sudanese army had managed to regain the initiative, reclaiming strategic areas such as Al-Jazira State, the capital Khartoum, and the important Jabal Moya region. These victories consolidated government control over the Nile heartland, the east, and the north.
In response, the RSF concentrated its forces in Darfur, the western stronghold that had become its fallback zone.
Al-Fasher, capital of North Darfur, emerged as the pivotal city for both sides, a final bastion for the army and a symbolic prize for the militia.
After an 18-month siege, the RSF launched a massive assault on 26 October, seizing control of the city and thereby completing its hold over all five Darfur states.
With this development, Sudan is now effectively divided into two zones: the RSF controls western Sudan and parts of South Kordofan, while the government holds the Nile valley, the east, and the north.
This de facto partition carries grave implications for the country’s unity, particularly given the RSF’s announcement in July of a self-proclaimed “parallel government” in the territories it controls. Although unrecognized internationally, such a move raises fears of a Libya- or Yemen-style fragmentation.
The human toll has been devastating. Reports from Sudanese and international organizations describe widespread war crimes in Al-Fasher, including mass killings, looting, rape, and deliberate destruction of infrastructure.
According to Sudan’s ambassador in Cairo, Emad Al-Din Adawi, “field reports and international organizations confirm massacres and acts of genocide against the city’s population.”
Adawi further warned that the RSF’s actions targeted communities on ethnic and racial grounds, “recalling the horrors of Rwanda’s genocide” and demanding urgent intervention by the international community and the UN Security Council.
The quartet’s initiative
Amid these grim developments, a new diplomatic effort has emerged: the International Quartet, comprising Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States, has been formed to coordinate a unified response to Sudan’s war.
Since the conflict began, numerous mediation attempts have been launched by neighbouring states, the African Union, IGAD, and international actors like Washington and Riyadh.
What sets the quartet apart is its effort to bring all major players under a single framework capable of exerting real leverage over both warring factions.
The quartet’s engagement began nearly a year ago with a consultative meeting held on the sidelines of the G7 foreign ministers’ gathering in Italy.
Subsequent meetings culminated in a ministerial session on 12 September that articulated a set of shared principles: safeguarding Sudan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity; rejecting any military solution to the conflict; and recognizing that prolonging the war poses “unacceptable suffering” and risks to regional peace.
Recently, the quartet announced a roadmap to end the conflict. According to Massad Boulos, senior adviser to US President Donald Trump for Middle East affairs, the plan envisions a comprehensive three-month ceasefire and nationwide cessation of hostilities, paving the way for a political transition while expanding humanitarian access across Sudan.
The roadmap rests on three pillars: a security track to end combat operations, a humanitarian track to ensure unimpeded aid delivery, and a political track to lay the foundations for inclusive governance.
Yet the ultimate question remains: Can the quartet succeed where others have failed, halting the slide toward partition and guiding Sudan toward peace? The answer will depend largely on its ability to compel both the army and the RSF, who continue to pursue military victory, to engage seriously with diplomacy.
Sudan’s uncertain future
The future of Sudan hangs in the balance. Several lessons from the country’s modern history deserve reflection.
First, no internal conflict in Sudan has ever been resolved by force. The civil war in the south ended only with the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Naivasha, while earlier accords in Abuja and Asmara brought partial peace to Darfur and eastern Sudan.
Second, all recent mediation efforts have failed to bring the two principal commanders, the army’s General Abdel-Fattah Al-Burhan and the RSF’s Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), to the same negotiating table. Initiatives in Jeddah, IGAD’s mediation attempts, and even the Geneva talks last year all collapsed before any substantive progress could be achieved.
Third, both sides remain entrenched in a logic of military confrontation. The Sovereignty Council’s recent statement explicitly rejected “any direct or indirect negotiations” with the RSF, reaffirming Khartoum’s commitment to a “national solution that preserves the state’s sovereignty.” Such rigidity leaves little room for compromise.
Finally, Sudan’s civil war cannot be separated from the structural crises that have plagued the state since independence: chronic failures of national integration, unresolved questions of identity, unequal distribution of power and wealth, and deep mistrust among political elites.
The divisions within Sudan’s political class, marked by polarization, mutual accusations of betrayal, and factionalism, have only compounded the devastation of war.
Between hope and reality
These realities must inform any attempt to chart Sudan’s future. The challenges extend far beyond the current conflict, encompassing decades of political fragility and external interference.
The quartet’s mission, though promising in scope, faces an immensely complex landscape shaped by trauma, mistrust, and exhaustion.
Ultimately, the road ahead will not be easy. The war has eroded the social fabric, displaced millions, and created wounds that diplomacy alone cannot heal. Yet the alternative, further fragmentation of Sudan into rival fiefdoms, is a prospect too grave to ignore.
In truth, optimism remains fragile. The country’s internal divisions and the absence of a credible national consensus render the most hopeful scenarios improbable.
Still, the effort to preserve Sudan’s unity is not merely a political imperative; it is a moral one, tied to the survival of a nation whose disintegration would reverberate far beyond its borders.
-------
*The writer is the editor-in-chief of Rosa Al-Youssef Magazine.
Short link: