Quartet statement and Sudanese aspirations for peace to end their suffering

By Abdelmoneim Madibo

The statement issued by the Sudan Quartet following their meeting in Washington last week has stirred-up the desire of the Sudanese people to bring peace to the country, which has been torn apart by war for more than two years, during which the rhetoric of war overshadowed the discourse of peace, and thwarted all local and international attempts to put an end to the tragedy that exhausted the Sudanese people and wiped out the green and dry.

The statement of the foreign ministers of the Quartet countries, consisting of the United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt, following their meeting in Washington last week, included important points that would put the Sudanese crisis on the path to a cessation of fighting between the armed forces and their supporters on the one hand, and the Rapid Support Forces and their allies on the other. The statement pointed out that there is no military solution to the war in Sudan, and that the current situation threatens international peace and security, and called on the two sides for a humanitarian truce for three days Months, followed by a permanent ceasefire, followed by the launch of an inclusive and transparent transition process that will culminate within nine months with the establishment of an independent civilian government based on legitimacy.

Mixed reactions

The Quartet’s statement was welcomed by the United Nations, the African Union, the IGAD, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Tasas government, the “Steadfast” alliance, and other parties. On the other hand, the Sudanese government in Port Sudan rejected the statement, saying that it was not concerned with anything, and the Islamic Movement denounced it as blatant interference in Sudan’s internal affairs and an attempt to impose external solutions.

The Democratic Bloc welcomed the efforts of the Quartet, stressing that the success of mediation requires listening to the voice of the Sudanese interior and dealing with the roots of the crisis, but rejected what it called “an attempt to legitimise the Rapid Support.” The Alliance of Forces for Radical Change considered the statement a blatant interference and an infringement on Sudan’s sovereignty and the independence of its decision-making.

Reliable Guarantees

Dr. Hanadi El Mek, a researcher at the Center for Peace Studies at Blue Nile University, sees the Quartet’s statement as an important acknowledgment that the conflict in Sudan cannot be resolved militarily. But she noted that the success of the proposed road map—which includes a humanitarian truce, a ceasefire, and a short civilian-led transitional period—remains contingent on credible guarantees and broad local ownership, otherwise it will fail as previous agreements have failed.

In an interview with Radio Dabanga, she added: “The challenges are many: the division of the parties between the army and the rapid support forces that refuse to give up completely, in exchange for civilian forces that condition the exit of the military from politics, the lack of trust due to the repeated violations of the truces, the weakness of the mechanisms for the implementation of previous agreements, the worsening humanitarian crises, and the conflict of regional interests of the Quartet countries themselves.”

However, she stressed that opportunities remained, adding: “If used seriously, unified international pressure and sanctions mechanisms can be extracted from the parties.” She stressed that a humanitarian truce offers room for relief, and that a transparent political transition with a specific timetable could be a turning point. The involvement of IGAD, the African Union and the United Nations strengthens legitimacy and opens the door to genuine societal reconciliation.

A true Sudanese will

Dr. Hanadi believes that the success of the Quartet’s outputs depends more on internal Sudanese will than on external decisions, adding: “The Quartet may be a realistic and important step to save what can be saved, but it is not a magic wand. If it is not built on a broad civil front with common ground, it will face the same fate as previous initiatives.”

Journalist and former Minister of Information Faisal Mohamed Saleh agreed with her, who believes that the international position alone is not enough to impose peace in Sudan. “The Quartet’s statement is a very important development in the course of the issue of war and peace in Sudan, and it is one of the important developments in almost three years now, as the war is almost entering its third year,” he told Radio Dabanga.

He said that most important of all is how the Sudanese who call for an end to the war and those working for peace can take advantage of this statement and this international position. He added, “Because the international position alone does not mean that the war will end in Sudan, but it means that the opportunity has become great.”

He pointed out that there is pressure on the parties to the war and on the countries that support them, considering that this point is an occasion for the start of civil action demanding an end to the war. He stressed the need to mobilise the sectors of the Sudanese people themselves, saying that the lack of internal political will may render international pressures futile. He concluded that this is a very important moment to intensify civil action calling for the cessation of the war, and to intensify international and local contacts, and grassroots mass action to reach the larger goal: Stop the war in the country.

For her part, the leader of the Sudan Peace Appeal Initiative, Asma Ahmed El Naim, considered the statement of the Quartet as a step forward in stopping the war in Sudan. At the same time, she expressed her hope that what was stated in the statement would be achieved on the ground, but pointed out the need for the Quartet countries to accompany the civilian forces in their steps to establish peace, so that the crisis is completely resolved and the Sudanese people obtain real peace. She stressed that the Sudanese must lead the peace process themselves.