As the U.S.-Sponsored Peace Talks Loom, Warlords’ Absence Threatens to Derail Sudan’s Fragile Peace Prospects
The highly anticipated U.S.-sponsored peace talks on Sudan, set to kick off in Geneva this week, are teetering on the brink of collapse before they even begin. The warring factions, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), have yet to confirm their attendance, casting a long shadow of doubt over the potential for a cease-fire deal.
Tom Perriello, the U.S. special envoy for Sudan, delivered a sobering update to journalists on Monday, revealing that neither the SAF nor the RSF had provided the necessary confirmation for the talks to proceed as planned on the 14th. “We have had preliminary engagements with both sides, but no firm affirmation,” Perriello lamented from Geneva. His remarks highlighted the grim reality that the peace talks might be doomed from the start.
The stakes could not be higher. Sudan is currently embroiled in what the United Nations describes as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. The conflict, which erupted in April 2023, has displaced more than 10.7 million people within the country and driven an additional 2 million across its borders. The situation has reached a dire point, with 25.6 million people—half of Sudan’s population—facing acute hunger. The famine declaration in Zamzam camp, North Darfur, underscores the catastrophic nature of the crisis.
Despite the harrowing conditions, previous attempts to broker peace have fizzled out. Perriello, however, remains cautiously optimistic, stating that efforts will continue regardless of the two warring factions’ attendance. “We will move forward with our international partners to establish a concrete action plan,” he asserted. This plan would address the cessation of violence, ensure full humanitarian access, and implement a monitoring mechanism, all critical components to alleviating the suffering in Sudan.
The absence of the RSF, who have reportedly committed to participating only if SAF shows up, adds another layer of complexity. Perriello has left the door open for the RSF’s involvement, should SAF decide to send a decision-making delegation. This ongoing uncertainty has raised concerns about whether meaningful dialogue will occur or if the talks will dissolve into yet another round of diplomatic theater.
Compounding the crisis is the plight of El Fasher, a hotspot of intense fighting between the SAF and RSF. The U.S. has been vocal about the need for an immediate cease-fire to facilitate humanitarian relief to the besieged area. “The United States has been extremely clear that the RSF must stand down from the siege of El Fasher,” Perriello stressed. Yet, despite four weeks of negotiations aimed at securing local cease-fire agreements, relief efforts remain hampered.
As the talks are set to span up to 10 days, the format may include both proximity talks and, if possible, in-person discussions. Perriello emphasized that direct conversations with both parties would be ideal but acknowledged that such an outcome is increasingly unlikely if key figures fail to attend. “We will not be able to conduct in-person mediated talks if the parties are not present,” he noted, highlighting the precarious position of the negotiations.
The international community, including co-hosts Switzerland and Saudi Arabia, as well as Egypt, the UAE, the African Union, and the UN, are all invested in the outcome of these talks. However, the looming possibility of a no-show by the warring factions threatens to undermine these collaborative efforts and prolong Sudan’s suffering.
In the wake of these developments, the world watches with bated breath. The potential failure of the Geneva talks could spell disaster for Sudan, a nation already grappling with unimaginable humanitarian challenges. As the date approaches, the hope for a breakthrough remains fragile, and the international community’s resolve will be tested.
