A Multi-Faceted War: a History of the Coups of Sudan
The history of Coup’s within Sudan
In 1956, Sudan was set to become an independent state. Before Sudan could break away from both British and Egyptian rule at the time, the civil war between the north and south had broken out. This war was between the Sudanese government of the north and the unified separatist movement of the south. This conflict lasted for 17 years until an agreement was reached between both parties who signed an agreement in Ethiopia. This led to the creation of the Southern Sudan Autonomous Region (SSAR) in 1972.
South Sudan is bordered by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, the Central African Republic, and Uganda. This agreement lasted until 1983 when a second civil war broke out. During the time of this war, discussions during various times took place between the Government of the Republic of the Sudan (GOS) and Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and Sudan’s People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) between May 2002 and December 2004.
The Second Sudanese Civil War
The Sudanese president Gaafar Nimeiry declared that Sudan was to become an Islamic state and that the autonomy of the people of SSAR and Christianity was to be invalidated. This led to the outbreak of the second Sudanese civil war. The South had more factions than in the previous civil war which led to a lot of fighting between each faction. The end of the second civil war was reached in 2005 and a new comprehensive peace agreement was signed in Nairobi between the Sudanese government and Southern Sudan. This civil war finally ended in 2005 with the creation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. The parties involved acknowledged that this agreement should provide a blueprint for good governance in order to foster peace and security for the region. Included within this agreement was a pre-interim period, to ensure steps were taken to uphold the permanent ceasefire and the establishment of the joint task teams. This includes the creation of the Joint National Transitional Team (JNTT), the Abyei Boundaries Commission (ABC), the Constitutional Task Team, and the Joint Technical Team.
Southern Sudan gained independence due to a vote for succession from Sudan. With an overwhelming majority of 98% Sudan became an independent nation on the 9th of July 2011 making South Sudan the youngest state. Two and a half years saw another civil war begin within South Sudan despite the creation of the 2018 peace agreement. This agreement was signed on the 12th of September in a bid to pave the foundations of a peaceful and prosperous society that would be based on justice and one that would uphold any human rights violations.
This civil war hit the civilians the most as it saw a rise in displacement as well as human right abuses. The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) is currently planning for hundreds of thousands of people to escape the violence taking place within Sudan and fleeing into neighbouring states such as the south of Sudan and Chad. Sudan is currently hosting over one million refugees many of which have fled into bordering states to flee from the continuing conflict.
Sudan is rated as one of the least democratic states in the world. In January of 2022 the civilian prime minister Abdulla Hamdok resigned due to protests over the opposition of the military government including the reinstatement of Abdulla as prime minister. These protests took place by the Forces of Freedom and Change coalition as well as the Sudanese people. The Forces of Freedom and Change is an organisation that centres on working towards the containment of conflict.
The Current Conflict
This conflict is between the military and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The RSF were originally part of the Janjaweed Militias which were a part of the conflict in Darfur in the 2000’s used to put down a rebellion. Since then, they have evolved into RSF in 2013 and were used to solidify borders and in 2015 were officially labelled as a regular force. Two years later they were legitimised as an independent security force. The RSF is currently engaged in combat in Khartoum, Sudan and other areas of the country. This conflict has killed over 50 civilians so far. The ongoing opposition to the protests of the coup that concluded in a power-sharing arrangement between the military and civilian leaders in 2019.
Due to the coup that took place in 2021 the military held coalition at the time led a coup that was justified through the instability of the country which led to fighting amongst civilians. Tensions between the military and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) sparked violence which has taken place in Darfur, Abyei and the regions of the Blue Nile. The fighting in Darfur was exacerbated by the civil war in Sudan back in the 1980’s. In order to root out the governmental forces posted in Darfur, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) fought and encouraged the locals to stand up against the governmental forces. As well as fighting in Darfur, the Blue Nile has seen an increase in ethnic violence due to the military taking power. Over 220 people have been killed as well as a rise in instability for South Sudan.
Due to the increase in protests to mark the first anniversary of the military coup has seen a rise in the backlash from the military. These protests are working towards the idea of a full civilian rule. In response to this, the military has rubber bullets, tear gas and sound bombs in order to disperse the crowds. Over 100 people have been killed through the use of force from the military as a part of the crackdown from the military. The people of Susan want to install a filly civilian government that will aid the Sudanese citizens. Those who led the coup have since cut off internet services in a bid to discourage the protest. These protests have taken place within Khartoum, Port Sudan and South Kordofan. These protests have been linked to the rejection of on-going US-led talks. The current aim of these talks is to broker a new style of leadership that consists of civilian and military power sharing. This share in power would be between the FCC and the military. Including this, there is anger at the possibility for an amnesty for the leaders of the coup. One is the former leader of the Sudanese armed forces while the latter is a higher ranking member of the RSF. This anger came from events during the 2019 sit-in when the RSF stormed and killed over 120 people. This has led to the need for a call of accountability from the people to those who participated in the coup’s.
Humanitarian Implications
The conflict has two major humanitarian implications. First, it risks direct harm to civilians caught up in the fighting. Second, it threatens shortages of essential services and widespread displacement that will contribute to the MENA region’s refugee crisis.
Violence against Civilians
The number of civilian casualties in Sudan continues to rise rapidly. Estimates vary, but most news organisations are citing internal reports from Sudan’s Ministry of Health that there are at least 500 dead and 4,000 wounded as of Tuesday 2nd May 2023. International organisations including Human Rights Watch and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees have stressed that the true figures are likely to be much higher because chaotic conditions on the ground are hampering information gathering efforts.
Violence in Sudan’s urban regions, particularly the capital city Khartoum, appears to be characterised by the indiscriminate use of heavy weaponry: artillery, warplanes and anti-aircraft fire. However, in Sudan’s outlying regions, the conflict is stirring up deep-rooted ethnic divisions between tribal communities, leading to more sinister and targeted communo-ethnic violence.
This is all the more alarming given Sudan’s chequered past of human rights violations; both sides of the current conflict have been accused of committing multiple atrocities across decades of military rule. Moreover, despite fierce domestic and international calls for them to do so, the alleged perpetrators have escaped any accountability. This builds a dangerous perception among Sudan’s warring factions that they are untouchable, which may embolden them to commit further atrocities in the current conflict. As Human Rights Watch has noted, a robust international response is therefore essential to deter further violence against civilians.
Supply Shortages
The conflict is severely disrupting access to essential supplies across Sudan, but particularly so in its western Darfur region, which now faces a major food shortage. Water and electricity are also scarce; civilians, trapped in their homes, are running dangerously low on these supplies as militants go door to door, ransacking whatever scarce resources are left.
This is especially dangerous given the pre-existing vulnerability of the population; over 9 million people in Sudan received support from the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) in 2022. The conflict now threatens to undermine efforts to relieve the food crisis, as reports of looted humanitarian warehouses and the deaths of food aid workers drove the WFP to temporarily suspend its Sudanese operations. As a result, the UN estimates that the fighting has disrupted ongoing treatment for 50,000 acutely malnourished children.
Infrastructural Destruction
The fighting has resulted in extensive collateral damage to infrastructure and residential areas around strategic military and government locations. Indirect damage caused by opportunistic looting and violence against civilians is adding to the cost of the fighting. The UN has reported that even its own offices in the major cities of Genena and Nyala have been attacked and looted.
Medical services have also been severely disrupted. The provision of healthcare had already been strained following Sudan’s 2021 coup, but doctors on the ground now warn that the healthcare system is in danger of imminent collapse. The UN estimates that just one in four health facilities in Khartoum are fully functional, with 32% closed and 43% only partially functioning.
Refugee Displacement
Indiscriminate violence and supply shortages are compounding to force civilians to flee their homes, causing the mass displacement of refugees from the country. As of Monday 1st May, the UN estimated that over 800,000 refugees had fled Sudan. Again, this compounds an existing refugee crisis in the region. Sudan had itself been housing refugees displaced from fighting in neighbouring Ethiopia and South Sudan. Those refugees must now move again and risk harm on dangerous routes where they are vulnerable to exploitation and violence at the hands of combatants.
International Reaction
The Sudan conflict has attracted, on the face of it, a swift and decisive international response. This has had two main objectives: evacuating foreign citizens and brokering a ceasefire. However, it is vital that this reaction does not fade even as the international community successfully extracts its own citizens from the region.
Evacuation of Foreign Citizens
As the crisis in Sudan unfolded, the international community has focussed on evacuating their own citizens and diplomats from the country. This has entailed dramatic airlifts from Khartoum’s international airport, convoys to the major coastal city of Port Sudan, and ships from Port Sudan to intermediary countries in the Middle East.
Ceasefire
A US-brokered ceasefire has been a major factor in enabling the success of the evacuations. Both the Sudanese Army and RSF agreed to temporarily suspend hostilities and allow international forces to extract their own citizens. However, this ceasefire has been most successful in and around key zones of international activity. In contrast, peace in the more isolated West Darfur has been far less stable, where fighting has continued regardless.
This is a dangerous indication that the only thing holding the ceasefire together may be the presence of international forces in Sudan. Once these forces withdraw, there is a real risk that the warring factions may feel emboldened to return to violence in the hope that, with its citizens safe, the international community will look the other way.
Exploitation
Confusion on the ground in Sudan presents an alarming opportunity for more sinister foreign interests to establish a foothold in the resource-rich country, Africa’s third largest gold producer. In particular, the US has raised concerns about the presence in Sudan of the Russian-backed mercenaries of the infamous Wagner Group, who are reportedly active on the ground and supplying weapons to the RSF.
Analysts from the Middle East Institute warn that Russia’s long-term goal is likely to undermine democracy and foster authoritarianism in order to safeguard its interests in the region, which include a planned naval base in Port Sudan and a gold mine north of Khartoum.
Future Challenges
In light of this potential for geopolitical exploitation, it is essential that the international community maintains its attention and continues to exert pressure on the belligerents. The end goal must be a permanent ceasefire to protect civilians who cannot escape, and the international community must not lose interest before this is achieved simply because their own citizens are now safe.
This is a real risk given the arguably individualistic approach to international evacuations; the UK was singled out by other nations as being slow to react, while the US conducted unilateral military operations to evacuate diplomatic staff. There has been little evidence of cooperation, which may indicate that the strength of the international reaction so far has been driven less by concern over the conflict itself, and more by each state’s own interests.
Similarly, international evacuations have focused on foreign nationals, while Sudanese citizens have encountered very different, and altogether more challenging, conditions for leaving the country. Refugees have encountered day-long waits and scarce humanitarian support at the border with Egypt and similarly lengthy queues to enter Chad and South Sudan.
It is essential that the international community offers meaningful humanitarian support to support Sudanese citizens who cannot rely on an international evacuation to whisk them out of harm's way, and for whom there is no end in sight to their current predicament.