Sudan's war is not just 'another African conflict'. When will the world step in?
Two years have passed since the outbreak of Sudan’s devastating war, ushering in a third year of fear, loss, tears, displacement and resilience against all odds.
Since the beginning of the war between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), Sudanese civilians have faced egregious human rights violations.
Beyond the battlefield, their suffering extends to systemic deprivation and exclusion, both within Sudan and in exile. The international community’s apathy has been manifested in policies that restrict their movement, deny them protection and limit humanitarian aid, essentially reducing civilians to personae non gratae.
The Sudan crisis remains under-reported by global media, leaving its horrors - including countless civilian deaths, abductions, torture, enforced disappearances and massive destruction - largely invisible to the world.
Systemic issues such as blackouts, food shortages, internet disruptions and areas covered in landmines have further compounded civilian suffering, while the devastated healthcare system struggles to cope with outbreaks of cholera, dengue fever and malaria.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Sudan has been described as the world’s largest humanitarian crisis, but calls by aid groups for urgent assistance have been met with a limited global response. Sudan’s plight has been sidelined, reinforcing the perception of selective empathy from the international community.
Sudan’s marginalisation was apparent even before the war, as seen in its prolonged designation by the US as a state sponsor of terrorism. Washington ended the designation in 2020 after Sudan agreed to pay a $335m settlement to terrorism victims.
The delay in removing sanctions stifled Sudan’s economic recovery, with former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok saying it hindered Sudan’s integration into the global economy and aggravated the country’s vulnerabilities: “It is indeed a story of neglect.”
Global indifference
Analysts have pointed out how international reluctance to support the Sudanese people - in particular, delays in debt relief and economic support - contributed to the failure of the civilian-led transition to a democratic government, setting the stage for subsequent political instability and the ongoing war.
Within days of the war erupting in Sudan in April 2023, diplomatic missions rushed to evacuate their citizens. The swift and highly coordinated response stood in stark contrast to the indifference shown towards Sudanese civilians left behind. Some countries, like the UK, even declined to assist bi-national Sudanese during the evacuation, asking them to find their own way to the airbase in Wadi Seidna in North Omdurman.
Hamdok noted that this same urgency could have been applied to secure a lasting ceasefire, but no such commitment materialised.
Shortly after the war broke out, the world watched as US diplomats were airlifted from their embassy in Khartoum, in a special operation that was meticulously documented and celebrated as a symbol of precision and triumph.
In the absence of sustained leadership from key global powers, regional actors with conflicting interests have gained influence in Sudan, perpetuating instability
But global media attention quickly dissipated. Cameras zoomed out. The US embassy in Sudan destroyed Sudanese passports being held for visa processing, effectively stranding applicants in a conflict zone. The justification that this was “standard operating procedure” did little to mitigate the harm caused.
Other western embassies evacuated their diplomats while leaving the passports of Sudanese visa applicants inside their premises. None have provided solutions, leaving visa applicants stranded and causing family separations, as passport-holding relatives have been forced to flee Sudan.
International responses to Sudanese refugees and asylum seekers further underscore the disparity in humanitarian treatment. In Canada, a family reunification programme launched in February 2024 imposed severe requirements on Sudanese Canadians seeking to bring their relatives to safety, including exorbitant costs that made the process unattainable for many. Some were kept waiting so long that loved ones passed away.
The US also exacerbated Sudanese suffering by suspending its refugee resettlement programme this past January - one of President Donald Trump’s first moves upon taking office. This decision left thousands of Sudanese asylum seekers in limbo, and coincided with the threat of an expanded travel ban targeting more than 40 countries, including Sudan.
'A war of choice'
The EU and US have been criticised for failing Sudan while extending more assistance to refugees from Ukraine. Last October, the EU focused on tightening migration controls, as Italy processed migrants offshore in Albania. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the EU could “draw lessons” from that policy.
Sudanese refugees and asylum seekers who do cross borders are met with resentment by some host communities, while facing delays and complications at UN refugee offices. Ironically, before Sudan’s current crisis, it had one of Africa’s highest refugee populations.
Sudan’s dire humanitarian situation has been exacerbated by the Trump administration’s suspension of most foreign aid, which caused the abrupt closure of around 80 percent of Sudan’s emergency food distribution centres. The move highlighted the devastating impacts of foreign policy decisions that prioritise geopolitical interests over humanitarian imperatives.
In the absence of sustained leadership from key global powers, regional actors with conflicting interests have gained influence in Sudan, perpetuating instability.
But Peter Stano, the EU’s foreign affairs spokesperson, has framed Sudan’s crisis as a regional issue, stating: “It’s not our neighbourhood… Sudan is an Islamic or Arab country.” By recognising the leadership of the Arab League and African Union, he effectively withdrew the EU’s responsibility, portraying the bloc as non-interventionist while dismissing the Sudanese crisis.
Indeed, this war has highlighted the moral contradictions of the international community. Western powers have demonstrated selective empathy, treating Sudan’s suffering as a distant and disposable tragedy. As analyst Alex De Waal noted in May 2023: “This is a war of choice; allowing it to happen was a failure of international diplomacy.”
The need for immediate humanitarian and diplomatic intervention is clear. Western states must reassess foreign aid suspensions and ensure equitable refugee polices, while pushing for a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire that centres Sudanese civilians. In addition, the global media must dismantle harmful, stereotypical narratives that frame Sudan’s war as merely “another African conflict”.
Sudan’s crisis is not just a product of domestic conflict. It reflects global complicity. Only through genuine and consistent engagement, and the rejection of selective empathy, can the world begin to rectify its failures and offer Sudan the solidarity it deserves.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
