Ce qu’il faut retenir
The latest attempt by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates to broker peace in Sudan is balancing on a knife-edge. Washington’s special envoy for Africa, Massad Boulos, rejects any tilt toward the Rapid Support Forces, yet army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan brands the initiative the “worst ever”, threatening to sink a three-month humanitarian truce.
Contexte
Sudan’s civil conflict erupted in April 2023 when the RSF, once an ally, turned its weapons on the army in a contest for national power. Since then, about twelve million people have been uprooted and famine-level conditions loom over several provinces (UN). Both factions stand accused of war crimes, including ethnic killings and sexual violence in Darfur (BBC).
Calendrier
The Quad floated its present roadmap in September, proposing an immediate ninety-day pause in hostilities, a subsequent permanent ceasefire and, ultimately, a transition to civilian rule. On Sunday, Burhan dismissed the blueprint because it retains RSF structures and, in his words, “sidelined the army”. Twenty-four hours later the RSF announced a unilateral three-month truce, styling it a response to US President Donald Trump’s appeal.
Quad diplomacy under scrutiny
Standing beside UAE presidential adviser Anwar Gargash on Tuesday, Boulos insisted that Burhan was “making reference to something that does not exist” when alleging bias (AFP). The envoy framed the Quad’s document as an impartial humanitarian lifeline. Yet Sudanese officials argue that Abu Dhabi supplies the RSF with weapons and foreign fighters, a charge the Gulf state flatly denies.
Burhan’s red lines
From Khartoum, the army leadership portrays any equivalence between national forces and what it calls a “racist terrorist militia” as unacceptable. Burhan further warns that as long as the UAE remains at the table, “future proposals will be one-sided”. His rhetoric re-energises nationalist sentiment inside army ranks, complicating Washington’s push for quick concessions.
Washington-Abu Dhabi messaging
Boulos’s joint press appearance with Gargash was calculated to project Quad unity. By publicly refuting the bias claim in Abu Dhabi, the envoy sought to neutralise doubts about the mediator’s integrity. Diplomats in Nairobi and Addis Ababa note, however, that the optics also tether US credibility to the UAE narrative, raising the cost of any future revelation about clandestine assistance to the RSF.
RSF ceasefire calculus
Analyst Kholood Khair describes the RSF’s truce offer as “largely a political ploy” designed to present the paramilitary as the more flexible actor in the eyes of Washington. The group followed the declaration with an assault on Babanusa, the army’s final West Kordofan bastion, underscoring Khair’s point. Such dual messaging may widen fissures inside the Quad on enforcement mechanisms.
Humanitarian stakes
With no reliable death toll, estimates run to 150,000 fatalities, while the UN labels Sudan the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. Khartoum endures sporadic drone attacks; El-Fasher reels from reports of mass killings after RSF forces overran the town. Aid corridors remain hostage to the frontlines, and relief agencies warn that cholera outbreaks could spread as the dry season intensifies.
Acteurs
The principal figures shaping the diplomatic chessboard are Burhan for the army, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo—known as Hemedti—for the RSF, and the Quad’s envoys led by Boulos. Secondary players include regional neighbours worried about spillovers, notably Egypt, South Sudan and Chad, each sheltering large refugee populations and lobbying for a solution that secures their frontiers.
Scénarios
If the Quad holds, behind-the-scenes pressure may push the parties toward a monitored ceasefire, with cross-border aid convoys as early confidence builders. A second path envisions protracted stalemate, where Burhan banks on battlefield gains to renegotiate the deal absent UAE mediation. The most perilous scenario is an RSF surge in Darfur triggering wider regional intervention and fragmenting Sudan into de facto fiefdoms.
Diplomatic balancing act
For Washington, rescuing the truce would demonstrate renewed US leverage in the Red Sea corridor after years of perceived retreat. For the UAE, dispelling the bias narrative protects its broader soft-power agenda in Africa. Success hinges on coaxing Burhan back to the table without alienating the army’s rank and file—a task demanding deft sequencing of humanitarian relief, security guarantees and political incentives.
What next for the Quad?
Boulos insists no conditions are being imposed, yet Sharm el-Sheikh and Riyadh diplomats whisper about calibrated sanctions on commanders who sabotage talks. Whether such sticks accompany future carrots remains unclear. What is evident is that each passing week of deadlock entrenches frontlines, amplifies civilian suffering and narrows the window for a negotiated Sudan that can one day turn the page on war.
