Despite Ceasefire Plan, Sudanese Civil War Shows No Sign of De-escalation

Photo via Getty Images

***

On November 7, 2025, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a Sudanese paramilitary organization, agreed to a humanitarian ceasefire proposed by a US-led peace delegation. The ceasefire proposes an end to 2 years of violence between the internationally recognized government led by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the militia-turned-paramilitary organization, the RSF. The SAF has yet to respond to the RSF announcement, nor has either party indicated that they are taking steps towards demilitarization. Furthermore, violence has not decreased. 

Failure to Coalesce

The RSF emerged as a powerful military organization in the Sudanese political sphere following its assembly and utilization by the al-Bashir regime to suppress ethnic minority rebellions in the western regions of the country during the Darfur conflict. The RSF grew out of the Janjaweed, a loose coalition of Arab nomads operating in the Sahel. Following the fall of the al-Bashir regime in 2019 and the subsequent coup in 2021, the SAF and the RSF entered a powersharing agreement as the two largest military wings of the Sudanese government at the time. In particular, the RSF commander, Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo Musa (known as Hemedti), holds significant personal power in the nation. 

As a result of growing tensions between Hemedti and the SAF leadership, Hemedti attacked military sites in Khartoum, sparking the current Sudanese Civil War.

Failure to Cooperate

The ceasefire, jointly proposed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates (a group known as the Quad), constitutes a three-month humanitarian pause intended to pave the way for civilian rule. 

The varying policy positions of the Quad are concerning. While the US does not have a particularly grave preference for either party, the other three members hold distinct allegiances. Saudi Arabia has provided diplomatic assistance to the SAF throughout the war, prioritizing stability in the Red Sea above all else. Egypt, which is dependent on Sudan’s stability for the security of the Nile, has explicitly supported the SAF. The Egyptian leadership also fears that democratic fervor in Sudan could spread north and destabilize their current regime. 

Most divisively, the UAE views Sudan as a key part of its foreign policy platform centered on rapidly asserting economic control over the Middle East. Furthermore, the RSF (often linked to Islamist powers) stands in opposition to the UAE’s anti-Islamist campaign. As a consequence, it is unlikely for the SAF to join this ceasefire, primarily due to the presence of the UAE. 

Failure to Resolve

Without the continued backing of foreign organizations, combined with increased sanctions and pressure from international regulatory bodies, the SAF and RSF would be militarily weakened and possibly forced to the negotiating table. The information currently available suggests that it is unlikely that the RSF-supported truce is in good faith.

The Sudanese conflict has created the largest humanitarian crisis in the world. Over 150,000 have been killed and over 30 million people require humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, the RSF has instigated a genocide of non-Arab populations in the western region of the country, reigniting ethnic violence dating back to the Darfur conflict. Foreign powers such as the UAE, Russia, and the United States have tacitly permitted this violence to continue through continued meddling in Sudanese internal affairs. 

The problem is bigger than politics: men, women, and children are raped, starved, and murdered every single day, while peace talks harp on about the number of gold mines Hemedti can own and the political aspirations of foreign powers. Until the international community makes the health and security of humans its top priority, the Earth will remain trapped in constant cycles of sectarianism and violence. 

***

This article was edited by Thomas McCarthy and Madison Boyd.