The tragic reality is that Sudan is being sacrificed on the altar of global and regional geopolitics, where powerful nations are supporting the warring factions—the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)—in a classic proxy conflict for strategic influence, resources, and regional dominance.

This external interference is the primary factor prolonging the conflict, enabling mass atrocities, and frustrating all attempts at a sustainable, negotiated peace. The flow of arms and financial aid ensures that neither General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (SAF) nor General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo 'Hemedti' (RSF) has a compelling incentive to stop fighting, as both are confident they can outlast the other with the help of their foreign backers.

The Proxy Battleground: Who Supports Whom and Why

The Sudanese civil war is not just a domestic power struggle; it is a convergence point for the conflicting interests of several powerful regional and global actors, primarily centered on the Red Sea, access to gold and agriculture, and regional ideological rivalries.

1. The Pro-RSF Camp: The United Arab Emirates (UAE)

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is widely reported to be the most influential and consistent foreign backer of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Their support is driven by a mix of economic and ideological interests:

• Economic Control (Gold): Sudan is a major gold producer. Before the conflict, the RSF, through its affiliated companies, controlled much of the gold mining and export sector, with Dubai serving as a major hub for Sudanese gold. The UAE is interested in maintaining access to these lucrative mineral resources, which the RSF's control facilitates.

• Ideological Rivalry: The UAE sees the SAF as having historical ties to the Islamist elements of the former Omar al-Bashir regime. The UAE actively seeks to contain political Islamist movements across the region and views Hemedti as a secular-leaning, effective counterforce to this perceived threat.

• Geopolitical Executor: The UAE has previously used the RSF's mercenary forces in conflicts like the war in Yemen and Libya, establishing a long-standing working relationship. Supporting Hemedti serves to secure a reliable, powerful executor of Emirati interests in the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea corridor.

2. The Pro-SAF Camp: Egypt, Turkey, and Iran

The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General al-Burhan, has drawn support from countries with historical and strategic ties to the conventional Sudanese military:

• Egypt (The Nile and Security): Egypt's core interest is the stability of its southern border and, critically, control over the Nile River waters. Cairo historically views the SAF as the legitimate, stable force in Sudan and a necessary ally in its dispute with Ethiopia over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Egypt has provided military aid and logistical support to the SAF to counter Hemedti, who is perceived as a destabilizing force and a potential partner for Egyptian rivals.

• Turkey and Iran (Red Sea Influence): Both Turkey and Iran have sought to deepen their influence in the Red Sea, a vital maritime corridor. Turkey has supplied military drones to the SAF. Following al-Burhan's visits, Iran also deepened its military cooperation, reportedly providing drones and weapons in exchange for access or agreements related to Port Sudan. This forms a complex web where regional rivals arm opposing sides.

3. The Global Wildcard: Russia

Russia is another significant, if opportunistically aligned, external actor, primarily interested in resource extraction and strategic access:

• Strategic Access (Naval Base): Russia has long sought a naval base on the Red Sea, and the SAF-controlled Port Sudan is a strategic location. Al-Burhan has been open to this possibility, which would give Russia a critical geopolitical foothold.

• Mercenary/Gold Ties: Prior to the war, the Wagner Group (a former Russian-backed mercenary organization) was heavily involved in Sudan's gold mining sector, often in cooperation with the RSF. While alignments have shifted, Russia's interest remains focused on lucrative resource exploitation and maintaining its leverage with whichever faction offers the best deal.

   

The Cost of Proxy War: Prolonging the Suffering

The external support, whether financial or military, is the single greatest obstacle to ending the conflict, effectively making Sudan an expendable buffer state in a larger regional power game.

The Mechanism of Entrenchment

• No Incentive for Peace: When a warlord is running out of money, ammunition, and fuel, he is forced to the negotiating table. When external sponsors provide an endless supply of all three, the cost of continuing the war drops dramatically. The generals are not fighting for their immediate survival; they are fighting for total victory, guaranteed by the continuous flow of foreign military materiel and financial aid.

• Fueling Atrocities: The external lifeline allows both the SAF and RSF to ignore international condemnation and the threat of sanctions. It facilitates the very war crimes and acts of ethnic cleansing in Darfur that have defined the conflict, as the perpetrators believe they are politically and militarily shielded by their powerful sponsors.

• Undermining Diplomacy: Every African Union or IGAD-led mediation effort is instantly compromised by the knowledge that the true decision-makers—the external backers—are not fully committed to the process. For the warring parties, the talks (like those in Jeddah) become merely a tactic to buy time or rearm, not a path to genuine political settlement.

The Global Consequence

The lack of decisive intervention by major Western powers like the United States and the European Union further enables this sacrifice. These Western actors are often reluctant to challenge their own major trading partners (like the UAE) who are actively funding the proxy war. This selective accountability prioritizes strategic alliances in other areas (such as counter-terrorism or the politics of the Persian Gulf) over the humanitarian imperative in Sudan.

In essence, Sudan's geopolitical value—its access to the Red Sea, its vast gold reserves, and its role in the balance of power between Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Gulf states—has become a curse. The country has been fragmented into spheres of influence, and its civilian population, enduring the world's largest displacement crisis and genocidal attacks, is paying the ultimate price for the competing ambitions of foreign states.