A hidden battle is unfolding between Egypt and the UAE in Sudan’s civil war, with Egypt supporting the SAF and the UAE backing the RSF. Recent sanctions have targeted leaders of both factions, highlighting human rights violations. Despite their investment ties, Egypt and the UAE are at odds over Sudan’s future, complicating regional security and humanitarian efforts amid a dire crisis.
In the context of Sudan’s ongoing civil war, a less apparent struggle for power is intensifying between Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Egypt has aligned itself with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), while the UAE supports the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a conflict that ignited on April 15, 2023. The ongoing violence has precipitated a humanitarian disaster, inching Sudan towards total breakdown.
The Biden administration designated sanctions against RSF leader Hemedti for his role in genocide, and against SAF’s General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan for obstructing peace efforts and blocking aid. Despite substantial evidence of UAE’s involvement in aiding the RSF during the conflict, it maintains a facade of neutrality which U.S. officials have publicly contested. During a Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directly accused the UAE of supporting a genocidal entity.
Egypt’s support for the SAF has become increasingly visible, with Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stressing the necessity of distinguishing the Sudanese army from other factions during a press conference. He has affirmed Egypt’s dedication to bolstering the Sudanese army’s capabilities in partnership with security allies in the Horn of Africa, including Eritrea and Somalia.
Despite generally aligning on regional issues, Egypt and the UAE find themselves on opposing sides in the conflict in Sudan. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has historically relied on Gulf nations like the UAE for support following the 2013 military coup that ousted the Muslim Brotherhood, yet recent investments by the UAE have not aligned their strategies for Sudan.
For Egypt, the military is seen as a fundamental force for stability, in stark contrast to its view of the RSF. The return of Sudanese refugees to their homeland when the SAF retakes areas validates Egypt’s stance, while any gains made by the RSF lead to further refugee outflows.
With over 1.2 million Sudanese refugees in Egypt, managing this influx has become critical, especially with fears of a total state collapse in Sudan potentially triggering another wave of refugees. Additionally, Egypt’s interests are tied to the security of Nile waters, jeopardized by the turmoil in Sudan and Ethiopia’s assertion of its upstream rights.
Sudan has been a vital ally for Egypt regarding Nile water security in the face of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Sudan’s foreign minister has reiterated this alliance, indicating a commitment to stand by Egypt, implying that military options remain if an agreement with Ethiopia is not reached.
As Sudan descends into chaos, Egypt’s leverage in negotiations over Nile management is diminishing, leading to the advancement of the Cooperative Framework Agreement with South Sudan, thereby challenging Egypt and Sudan’s historical privileges over Nile waters. Consequently, Egypt is transitioning to form a security coalition with Eritrea and Somalia to counter these regional threats.
The UAE’s interests in Sudan have faced setbacks as the RSF struggles to assert control, disrupting the UAE’s plans to exploit Sudan’s gold resources and enhance food security. Recent governmental actions from Sudan have included the cancellation of key development projects such as the Abu Amama port, reflecting a broader rejection of UAE influence in the country.
Egypt perceives the SAF as pivotal to Sudan’s state structure, emphasizing the need for the military to remain dominant in any emerging governance framework. Conversely, the UAE aims to harness the RSF for resource extraction, disregarding Sudan’s sovereignty and stability in favor of its strategic ambitions.
Recognizing the need for dialogue, the Sudanese government has expressed a willingness to negotiate with the UAE, contingent upon the cessation of RSF support and compensation for the damage incurred. While this could provide a resolution avenue, it poses significant challenges for the UAE in acknowledging its role in fostering the humanitarian crisis.
Given the current dynamics, Egypt is strategically positioned to mediate between Sudan’s interests and the UAE’s narratives. Recent diplomatic exchanges suggest a burgeoning initiative for peace, and Egypt’s foreign minister’s engagement could rekindle hope for a ceasefire while addressing ongoing conflict in Sudan.
The U.S. could play a pivotal role in facilitating discussions between Egypt and the UAE, mediating efforts to align their goals for Sudan’s stability. The alternative—continued external support for opposing factions—could deepen the protracted conflict erupting from Sudan’s civil war.
The article provides insights into the complex geopolitical landscape affecting Sudan amidst its civil conflict. Egypt and the UAE are engaged in a covert power struggle, with Egypt favoring the SAF and the UAE backing the RSF. The backdrop includes humanitarian crises, sanctions from the U.S., and the strategic interests each nation has in Sudan, particularly concerning military influence and resource extraction.
Egypt and the UAE’s opposing involvements in Sudan’s civil war underscore the shifting dynamics in regional power and influence. The interlinked issues of refugee crises, Nile water security, and economic interests complicate their respective strategies. A mediating role for Egypt, with potential U.S. support, may provide a path toward peace; however, the contrasting visions for Sudan’s future remain a significant hurdle.
Original Source: responsiblestatecraft.org
