The Sudan blame game

Volker Perthes, the United Nations’ chief mediator for Sudan, has hit a wall. The Sudanese government has declared him persona non grata, barring him from entering the country. Perthes was frozen out of ceasefire talks hosted by the United States and Saudi Arabia, while African governments have seized the initiative from the U.N. to lead negotiations aimed at ending the country’s monthslong civil war. From Khartoum to Capitol Hill and Moscow, Perthes has been blamed for letting a fragile transition from decades of dictatorial rule to democracy evaporate. “This is a moment where someone’s head needs to roll, and unfortunately, it looks like it’s Perthes,” Suliman Baldo, a former U.N. consultant and executive director of the Sudan Transparency and Policy Tracker, told Devex. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has rallied to Perthes’ defense, claiming that the world body and Perthes are being unfairly made to shoulder the blame for the failure of Sudan’s armed leaders to accept civilian rule. In an emotional and angry closed-door briefing to the U.N. Security Council, Guterres said the 15-member chamber should either demonstrate its full support for its diplomatic efforts in Sudan, or consider shutting down the mission. The U.N., according to Guterres, is “increasingly being made a scapegoat in situations with complex peace operations or unorthodox political crises,” according to a confidential written account of the May 31 meeting reviewed by Devex. The U.N., he added, “should not be ‘begging to do its job’ in countries that did not treat it with respect,” according to the readout. Guterres expressed “full confidence” in Perthes, who will continue in his role from the new headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya. The exchange came just days after Sudan’s military leader, Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, accused Perthes in a letter to Guterres of thwarting reconciliation efforts, rushing political negotiations, and failing to adequately consult key diplomats. In Washington, meanwhile, lawmakers pressed Guterres, unsuccessfully, to dump the former German scholar and security expert and appoint David Beasley, former leader of the World Food Programme, or another prominent official. Despite Guterres’ vote of confidence, Perthes’ stock is rapidly plunging in Khartoum, and his ability to mediate is impaired by the ongoing fighting. “Look, it’s no doubt that being PNGd [persona non grata] is not a pleasant position. There is no doubt this is an impediment,” Perthes told Devex in a phone interview. But he noted that he will still be able to participate in regional peace efforts being led by the African Union and Sudan’s neighbors. “These are important initiatives and we are part of it.” Plenty of finger-pointing Sudan’s latest conflict — which began on April 15 — pits Gen. Burhan against Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, or Hemedti, the leader of a paramilitary outfit Rapid Support Forces, which gained notoriety for committing some of the worst atrocities in Khartoum’s prior wars in Darfur, South Kordofan, and the Nuba Mountains. Hemedti also amassed enormous wealth, exploiting a rich vein of mineral resources in the country’s conflict zones. Together, the two armed leaders led a 2019 military coup against Sudan’s decadeslong dictator and accused war criminal, Omar al-Bashir, following nationwide protests against the Islamist regime. They subsequently toppled the civilian caretaker prime minister, Abdalla Hamdok, leader of a transitional government they helped establish. “This is a moment where someone’s head needs to roll, and unfortunately, it looks like it’s Perthes.” --— Suliman Baldo, executive director, Sudan Transparency and Policy Tracker But the two strongmen — who were publicly committed to transition to civilian rule — clashed over the terms for integrating their forces into a unified army. In April, the two sides took up arms, pitching the country into an all-out civil war and dousing prospects for a democratic transition. The attacks on Perthes are part of a wider stream of recriminations coursing through the diplomatic world over assigning responsibility for the collapse of decades of diplomatic efforts by four United States administrations and three U.N. secretary-generals to stabilize Sudan, which emerged from the continent’s bloodiest civil war after the 2005 signing of a U.S.-brokered peace deal. In Washington, the Biden administration has faced sharp criticism for allegedly sidelining the country’s civilian protest movement, which triggered Bashir’s ouster — a claim the U.S. denies. Republican lawmakers were quick to cast blame on Biden for what they characterized as a failure to capitalize on the former strongman’s fall, claiming the administration invested its diplomatic faith in Sudan’s generals. They also insisted it is time for Perthes to go. “What we are seeing today is a failure of diplomacy in Sudan,” said a Republican House staffer, who asked not to be identified. We are in a “new stage” of the Sudanese crisis, and “There is a need for renewed attention and renewed personnel.” Baldo, who has previously advised the U.N. on justice and human rights, said Perthes had become the target of a political smear campaign by a faction of Islamists linked to former dictator Bashir and increasingly influential in the Sudanese military and foreign ministry. The Islamists, he said, “were campaigning all along against the entire idea of a role for the United Nations in Sudan to guide the political process.” Burhan has denied he has lent support to members of Bashir’s Islamist party. Perthes acknowledged to Devex that there are legitimate reasons to question whether the international community misread the warring parties’ commitment to a political transition. “These are questions that need to be asked: Did we overestimate their preparedness to accept a civilian transition just because they said they would accept it and repeated it?” he asked, referring to the Sudanese army. “On the other hand, did we underestimate the vested interests of Hemedti in maintaining his autonomy and his fear he would be squeezed into a position of losing it and losing his economic empire?” Derailed transition The current crisis in Sudan is the latest chapter in a power struggle dating back to Bashir’s 2019 overthrow, following months of national protests that were triggered by rising food prices. In April of that year, Sudanese forces under the command of Burhan toppled Bashir and entered into talks with opposition elements and protest groups on a shift to democracy. Several months later, Sudan established a transitional government under a civilian prime minister, Hamdok. The Security Council established the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan in June 2020 to assist Khartoum in its move to democratic rule, including support for political negotiations, drafting a new constitution, and helping to mobilize economic and development funds to back the country’s emergence from decades of autocratic control. But the transition faced serious hurdles. Burhan, backed by Hemedti, led another military coup in October 2021 and placed the prime minister and other cabinet members under house arrest. The country’s prospects for attracting investment and development funds, meanwhile, have dried up. In December 2022, Burhan and Hemedti struck a new deal, known as a framework agreement, with a coalition of dozens of civilian political elites on a transition to a democratic government. A final deal was supposed to be struck in April, but instead the two factions plunged the country into violence. The diplomatic stalemate over Perthes’ future is playing out against a backdrop of worsening violence in Sudan, fueling fears that the conflict could metastasize, drawing Sudan's neighbors Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, and South Sudan, into a regional war. “The scale and speed of Sudan’s descent into death and destruction is unprecedented. Without strong international support, Sudan could quickly become a locus of lawlessness, radiating insecurity across the region,” Guterres said at a June 19 donor pledging meeting for Sudan. “The situation in Darfur and Khartoum is catastrophic. Fighting is raging with people attacked in their homes and on the street.” Darfur, the scene of genocide in the early aughts, has emerged as the latest theater of bloodshed. In recent weeks, the paramilitary RSF has unleashed a wave of killings of the Masalit tribe, a non-Arab ethnic minority. Its fighters allegedly killed Khamis Abdullah Abakar, the governor of West Darfur, where the tribe is one of the two major ethnic groups, along with the Fur. “Compelling eyewitness accounts attribute this act to Arab militias and the Rapid Support Forces,” according to a statement by the U.N. Mission in Sudan. But while the excesses of the paramilitary forces have soured their relationship with the local population, the Sudanese Armed Forces squandered whatever goodwill they may have gained through an often indiscriminate air strike campaign. In his May 31 briefing to the council, Guterres said he had initially assumed Hemedti’s paramilitary forces were responsible for the civil war. But he changed his mind after the warlord told him the conflict was triggered by Islamist radicals who seized control of the army and feared the transition to civilian rule threatened their aim to secure power. “The Secretary-General had concluded that that assessment was at least partially true,” according to the account. “Leading up to the eruption of violence, both sides had built up “massive” military capabilities in Khartoum,” Guterres told the council, according to the readout. “Therefore, it seemed likely that the confrontation had not been deliberately started by just one side, but had rather been triggered after both sides had already engaged in a progressive build-up.” But it remains unclear who started the fighting. “I don't know who fired the first shot,” said Perthes. Taking sides The collapse of Sudan's democratic transition has left diplomatic observers and lawmakers pointing fingers at the U.S., U.N., and African mediators for their diplomatic choices. Have they done too little to advance the aims of Sudan’s civilians and protesters who sparked the revolution that ended Bashir's reign of power? Have they gone too easy on Sudan’s military leaders, forgoing sanctions even as they detained, mistreated, and murdered protesters and civilian politicians? Did they miss the signs? Key outside powers have lined up on different sides of the conflict, with Russia and the United Arab Emirates aligned more closely with Hemedti’s forces. Egypt is said to back the Sudanese Armed Forces, while Saudi Arabia has ties to both camps. Cairo has faced criticism for pursuing a freelance diplomatic initiative perceived as undercutting prospects for a democratic transition. The AU has competed aggressively to carve out the dominant negotiating position. Meanwhile, the U.N. and Sudan’s civilian leaders were frozen out of U.S. and Saudi Arabia ceasefire talks in Jeddah. The U.S. and U.N. diplomatic strategy has afforded too much deference to the warring parties, diminishing the role of the popular forces that precipitated Bashir’s downfall with massive demonstrations, according to one senior civilian Sudanese official. “Every brokered peace deal has always been with warring factions and that’s why we are in chronic wars,” the official told Devex. The U.S.- and Saudi-led led ceasefire negotiations have failed to end the fighting that erupted in April. The AU, for now, has seized the initiative, claiming a lead role in the mediation effort, with the U.N. in a supporting role. More importantly, the UAE, which wields perhaps more influence over Hemedti, did not participate. Burhan’s inner circle, meanwhile, has rebuffed offers by Africans, including the AU, to mediate. Earlier this month, Malik Agar, the deputy head of Sudan’s Sovereign Council, rejected a proposal to have Kenyan President William Ruto lead a group of regional leaders in trying to end the conflict, accusing the Kenyan of favoring Hemedti’s forces. A State Department spokesperson said that the warring parties did not allow other parties, including the U.N. or the AU, to participate in the ceasefire talks. But the spokesperson said the U.S. was in “close contacts” with U.N. relief experts and that Washington continues to support efforts by the Africans and the U.N. to “ensure humanitarian access, stop the fighting and support civilian leaders in developing a political process for the way forward.” ‘He’s an odd man out’ But the collapse of the transition in Sudan has increased scrutiny of the U.N.’s envoy. Perthes was not Guterres’ first choice to represent him in Sudan. In 2020, Guterres chose Nicholas Haysom, a South African lawyer and veteran U.N. troubleshooter, to lead the mission. But Haysom’s nomination was blocked by Sudan’s transitional prime minister Hamdok, who preferred a European candidate who could help secure funding from European capitals. The U.N. chief then set his sights on a French diplomat, Jean-Christophe Belliard, who was subsequently blocked by China and Russia, citing resistance to his appointment by elements within the Sudanese military. However, Security Council diplomats said Russia had stalled the appointment in retaliation for its belief that France, Britain, and the U.S. had opposed the appointment of a senior Russian officer in a peace operation. In the end, Guterres settled on Perthes. The German government had pressed for a broader diplomatic role in Sudan and Perthes was a respected head of a Berlin think tank and fluent in Arabic. But he was an unknown quantity in Khartoum and quickly rubbed some of his diplomatic colleagues the wrong way, particularly African diplomats from the AU. “He knew the language, but he didn’t know the culture,” said one diplomatic source. “He didn’t sufficiently appreciate the necessity of getting the Africans on board, as equal partners.” Sudan’s transitional leaders were initially enthusiastic about Perthes’ appointment, but he rankled some of his diplomatic colleagues. “Culturally he is an odd man out,” said Cameron Hudson, a former State Department and CIA analyst who focused on Sudan. “He has excellent Arabic.” Perthes “has never really found his groove in the sort of rough and tumble world of Sudanese politics,” Hudson added. “He has never been able to bridge the gap between his academic understanding and developing the kind of deft political touch within the community there: He never really fit in and rubbed a lot of people the wrong way in terms of his personal style and demeanor. It’s fair to say he does not have a following in Khartoum.” In Washington, Rep. Michael McCaul, a Republican from Texas and the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and the ranking member, Gregory Meeks, a Democrat from New York, issued a statement on May 1 calling on Biden and Guterres to appoint U.S. and U.N. special envoys “to urgently bring the warring parties to the negotiating table to end hostilities, and to facilitate the establishment of a civilian government.” In a private meeting, McCaul appealed to Guterres to appoint Beasley, who stood down as WFP chief in early April, to serve as his special envoy, according to a Republican staffer. But Guterres demurred. In his first weeks following the October 2021 military coup, Perthes began a listening tour with a cross-section of Sudanese society, including key military and civilian representatives. But AU officials complained he did not adequately brief them on his activities, according to a U.N. official Following complaints to the secretary-general, Rosemary Di Carlo, the U.N. under-secretary-general for political affairs, helped repair and establish a diplomatic troika, known as the Tripartite Mechanism, that would coordinate the diplomatic activities of the U.N., the AU, and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development . “We hugged it out and moved on,” said one U.N. official. A letter was ‘the last straw’ Perthes' relationship with armed forces chief Burhan was always somewhat fraught. In his first months on the job, Perthes had limited informal contact with Sudan’s top general, conducting most of his high-level discussions with the country’s then-transitional prime minister Hamdok. Following the October coup, Burhan grew enraged with Perthes for publicly characterizing the military’s detention of Hamdok and other civilian ministers as a coup. But the overthrow also forced the two into a closer working relationship, resulting in regular one-on-one Saturday meetings at the general’s home. In the days following the latest outbreak of fighting, Burhan once again voiced anger with Perthes because he declined to denounce Hemedti’s forces, which had engaged in looting, house seizures, and indiscriminate killings. Days later, Burhan wrote a letter to Guterres blaming Perthes for undermining the country’s peace process and demanded that he be fired from his job and replaced. In an extraordinary breach of diplomatic protocol, Burhan accused Perthes of a raft of unsubstantiated misdeeds and personal failings, including dishonesty, political bias, and incitement to hatred. “His behavior has been dominated by provoking crises, creating complexities and misunderstandings between political parties and civil society entities, while inciting hatred, deepening division, amplifying points of contention, and adopting extremist positions that undermined reconciliation and peace building, which have ultimately led to the crisis that faced the country in mid April,” he wrote in the April 26 letter. Guterres doubled down in the defense of Perthes. The U.N. chief was “shocked” by the letter and “is proud of the work done by Volker Perthes and reaffirms his full confidence in his Special Representative,” Guterres’s spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric responded with a terse public statement. In private, Guterres was said to be fuming at the general's attack on Perthes, according to one Western diplomat. The letter “was the last straw,” the diplomat said. “He was really fit to be tied.” The letter, Guterres told the council, contained “accusations, insults, lies and distortions,” according to the readout. In a show of support for Perthes, the State Department expressed concern over Burhan’s letter, and wrote that “Perthes continues to have our confidence in implementing the UNITAMS mandate and in supporting the Sudanese people to achieve a peaceful and democratic future.” “Our position towards Perthes is that he is more a victim of circumstance,” added a Security Council diplomat. “We think he had a difficult job and I don’t think anyone blames him for what happened. The SG [secretary-general] was right to defend his appointment.” In his closed-door meeting, Guterres received support for Perthes from key council members, including the U.S., Albania, Ecuador, France, Malta, and the United Kingdom. But Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said that while the warring factions were ultimately responsible for the violence in Khartoum, Perthes deserved some of the blame. Nebenzia accused Perthes of “not being impartial and publicly shaming the parties” for their role in the country’s October 2021 military coup, according to the internal account of Guterres’ briefing to the council. Perthes, according to Nebenzia, “rushed the transition process … [and] imposed his views on the process, which were not supported by the majority.” Concerns about Perthes’ shortcomings, according to Nebenzia, emanated from “all ends of the political spectrum.” Guterres swung back, insisting that the “accusations made against [Perthes] and ‘partially reproduced here by the distinguished representative of Russia,’ were either false or based on distorted versions of his statements.” The Chinese delegation said it would be unwise to invest the council’s political capital in defending Perthes, as Sudan had opened the door to continuing cooperation with the U.N., according to an account by two diplomats familiar with the exchange. The council’s three African governments, which have long pressed for a larger role for the AU, offered little backing for Perthes. The council ultimately issued a statement expressing support for the UNITAMS — but said nothing about its besieged leader. The council diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the confidential nature of the closed-door negotiations, said it would be a mistake to interpret the West’s decision not to fight to include a formal Security Council vote of confidence for Perthes as a sign of a lack of support. “The Russians made clear they would never accept it. We wanted the strongest statement possible supporting the U.N. mission.” The prospect of finding a replacement for Perthes could be daunting, particularly given the deep divisions within the Security Council. Although the U.N. secretary-general technically chooses his own envoys and special representatives, in practice those appointments are routinely vetted and informally approved by the Security Council’s permanent five members, the U.S., China, France, Russia, and the U.K. “There is a sense among Western governments that he is not the ideal person but at this point, he is better than nobody and closing up the mission.” From hope to hopeless A month before fighting broke out, Perthes provided the council with an upbeat appraisal of the situation, despite concerns by his diplomatic colleagues that the situation was swiftly deteriorating. “Today, we are the closest we have been to reaching a solution, although challenges remain,” Perthes said, citing an alarming rise in tension between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary RSF. Burhan and Hemedti, he said, “have repeatedly stressed that they want to see the process through and hand over power to a civilian government.” Perthes' optimism was founded on the belief that the landmark power-sharing pact — the framework agreement — between the key parties in December 2022 laid a path toward a credible political settlement. The two leaders were signaling they were on board and drafting a new constitution was underway. “Many shared the optimism of the Sudanese civilians who had been working tirelessly to craft a final agreement that could have led to a resumption of a democratic transition,” a State Department spokesperson told Devex by email. “At the same time, everyone recognized the risk that tensions between the SAF [Sudan Armed Forces] and RSF posed to Sudan.” Some observers thought Perthes’ assessment was too upbeat. “It is fair to say his March report was a bit rose-colored,” said Ernst Jan “EJ” Hogendorn, a former senior adviser to the U.S. special envoy for Sudan. “There were lots of warts in the process but I think everyone acknowledged it’s not the role of the facilitator to downplay the likelihood of success.” The U.S. and U.K., meanwhile, were working behind the scenes to try and craft an agreement on the key sticking point: The integration of Hemedti’s paramilitary forces into the Sudanese army. In March, they presented a white paper to Hemedti and Burhan stating that the paramilitary forces reporting line would run through the Sudanese army chain of command, not directly to the country’s new civilian head of state, which Hemedti preferred. The paper also sought to resolve a dispute over the timing of the paramilitary forces’ integration into the army. Burhan proposed a two-year transition, while Hemedti wanted 10 years. “The potential for conflict and miscalculation between the military commanders confronted every proposal for restoring civilian leadership of the government,” the State Department spokesperson said. “As a result we frequently worked to deescalate tensions, find agreeable solutions so that all stakeholders could come to agreement on a civilian government to restore democratic transition.” The two armed leaders struck a compromise, agreeing to complete the transition in less than a decade. But Hemedti — who still insisted on maintaining a direct reporting line to the new president — refused to report through the military chain of command. Burhan, meanwhile, was growing increasingly impatient with Hemedti and objected to being put on the same footing as the warlord. Burhan began hosting meetings at his guesthouse with key regional and international diplomatic players, including the Americans and the Saudis, to discuss the transition. He didn’t invite his rival. “Hemedti caught wind of the meeting, knocked on the door and wouldn’t be let in,” according to a diplomatic source. In the meantime, the Sudanese army and the paramilitary forces began moving their tanks and armed technicals into Khartoum, raising concerns that the situation could quickly spiral out of control. In an effort to tamp down tensions, Perthes reached out to influential regional powers, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to invite the two armed leaders to the region for talks, according to the diplomat. But they declined. The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the confidential nature of diplomatic discussions over Sudan, insisted that they were not trying to point the finger at foreign players. “You can only blame the guys who started this war; Burhan and Hemedti started this war.”