Sudan summit in London is a worthwhile endeavour but lacks ambition
It is not like Sudan’s brutal civil war has been forgotten.
The horrific consequences of a power struggle between two factions who once served the same government, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) – and their rivals, the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) – have been documented by journalists and aid groups and acknowledged by politicians in the West.
But the near-total-destruction of this country – with the deaths of more than 150,000 people – and the displacement of nearly 13 million people and the desperate humanitarian conditions including famine and the use of rape as a weapon of war – well, these things have been neglected and ignored.
In February, the UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy travelled to the massive refugee camps that have sprung up in neighbouring Chad. He asked himself, and us, “where is the liberal outrage?”
In what is an attempt then to lift the conflict off the bottom of what Lammy calls, “the hierarchy of conflict”, the British government is co-hosting a conference alongside the African Union and major European powers, to mark the two-year anniversary of the war.
The meeting is designed to focus minds on the atrocious conditions on the ground. The World Food Programme has confirmed the presence of famine in 10 separate locations, including the giant Zamzam displacement camp in the city of al Fasher in North Darfur.
In recent days, the Zamzam camp has come under bombardment by the RSF forces as they close in on al Fasher, the only city in Darfur still held by the Sudanese Army. More than 200 have been killed, and the aid agency Relief International said its doctors and drivers had been “mercilessly killed” in the assault by the RSF.
While the solicitation of donations for this humanitarian emergency is a vital move, this may be the only thing this London gathering might be able to accomplish.
On the ground, the civil war has developed into an attritional conflict led by these men – the Sudanese Army’s leader, General Abdel Fattah al Burhan, and the RSF’s Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo or “Hemedti”. Both show little willingness to settle their fight.
With their respective strongholds now largely secure, the very legitimacy of Sudan as a nation-state is up for grabs. The country could be partitioned by default, with the army centred around Khartoum in the east and the RSF claiming Darfur in the west.
Such an eventuality will offer little stability. Sudan is likely to remain chaotic and ungovernable – and utterly unable to provide for the basic needs of its people.
Extremist elements will look to take advantage. Jihadist forces loyal to former dictator Omar al Bashir have already joined the fray, with many warning that Sudan could provide fertile ground for the spread of regional terrorism.
Get Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow our channel and never miss an update.
Tap here to follow
Finally, we should recognise what is motivating the UK and other European countries on this issue. Yes, it is a vicious conflict that should mark the conscience of all those who seek peace and order.
But there is a large measure of self-interest here as well.
The conflict has already spilled over into the wider region, driving millions of people from their homes. Inevitably, some will continue their journeys to Britain and Europe. You could ask, with some justification, “what have they got to lose?”
It all comes at a time when the UK, the US and plenty of other countries are slashing their foreign aid spending.
The conference in London, in the grand surrounds of Lancaster House, is a worthwhile endeavour but lacks the ambition to tackle a problem that is a whole lot bigger than it looks.