The most beautiful thing said in describing the Rapid Support Militia is “A militia whose essence is terrorist in doctrine, coup-oriented, occupation-motivated, and foreign-sponsored”
In light of the desperate attempts of the Rapid Support Militia to impose a new reality in Sudan, news has been circulated about the Al-Dagalo militia sending a delegation headed by “Nasr al-Din Abdul Bari” and “Taha Ishaq” to Kenya to demand that it recognize a government that the militia seeks to announce in the areas under its control. If Nairobi recognizes a government formed by that militia, this means an explicit declaration of war on the Sudanese state and its capabilities. I do not think that Nairobi, in light of the internal division between its security arms, needs to open a war front with a country the size of Sudan. The new Kenyan administration led by “William Ruto”, if it is not aware of the consequences of what it will do if it does so, there are cadres, agencies, and long-standing Kenyan institutions with a history of intelligence and security in East Africa, and it certainly sees what the Kenyan presidential institution does not see. Therefore, it is aware of the consequences of accepting a “multi-national” militia government just a stone’s throw away, just as it is aware of the intersections that have stood between it and its regional neighbors since the 1970s until now. If Nairobi responds to the Rapid Support Militia’s request, Khartoum is likely to organize a secret Sudanese security cell to widen the gap between President William Ruto’s administration and the Kenyan security establishment to strike at all efforts to narrow it, and thwart all security arrangements made by Nairobi to obtain the support of traditional leaders in the Rift Valley region. Today, Nairobi faces the greatest internal security threat due to the weak cooperation between the army and the security services (the army and the police). Difficulties in coordination between the two parties have emerged in the northern Rift Valley since 2023, which prompted the Kenyan presidency to hold a high-level security meeting for senior security officials affiliated with the National Security Council and former army chiefs of staff. That meeting ended with the Kenyan administration acknowledging the great security difficulties in managing the Kenyan Defense Forces, which explains the recent dismissal of the Kenyan Defense Minister of Somali origin, Aden Duale. If Khartoum exploits the state of internal security deterioration that dominates Kenya, it is proposed to refer that operation to Mr. Qutbi Al-Mahdi, the former leader in The Sudanese Salvation Government for its broad, diverse and strong security relations with senior security officials in all East African countries, the threads of which were revealed in the nineties during the escape of the perpetrators of the bombing of the American embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam to Khartoum and the subsequent political, security, intelligence and social tensions imposed by Khartoum and realized by Nairobi. After the failure of the Geneva negotiations, an “artificial” calm prevailed in the American administration. The confusion surrounding the personality of the American envoy to Sudan, “Tom Perriello”, which he is trying hard to hide, is nothing but confirmation of the state of political evasion surrounding American diplomacy in Sudan. Washington does not want a real civilian rule in Sudan, as is the case with all the regional parties active in the Sudanese file. The difference between the two is that Washington realized early on and even put among its priorities and security calculations not to come out to the world in a public manner that contradicts the popular will, due to its prior awareness that opposing living, conscious peoples “intellectually and politically” is the shortest way to kill its future presence in Africa, especially in light of the pivotal transformations that the African continent has witnessed during the past five years. This explains its constant keenness to use these parties to implement its future vision in Sudan after Al-Bashir “according to an African point of view”, and to draw a line for new Sudanese relations with its African, regional and global surroundings, and to talk about the strategy of the American envoy to Sudan as represented by focusing on elite groups and activists. The supporters of democracy at the grassroots level remind me of the visit of the US ambassador and the European Union ambassadors to the sit-in square in Khartoum during the December 2019 revolution, which certainly did not come in support of the demonstrators’ demands as much as it was an acquittal of Washington Square and its Western counterpart when that square was filled with the blood of the demonstrators. As for the proposal to ban arms against the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces militias, which was made by the US envoy a few days ago, it is nothing but an “American” admission of the impossibility of defeating the Sudanese army and a signal for the beginning of the end of the chapters of the “military outing” that they wanted to recreate and repeat its circumstances in “Khartoum” after its success in “Baghdad” in 2003. This proposal would not have been announced, let alone threatened to be implemented, had it not been for the steadfastness of the Sudanese national military institution and its operational organization of the battlefields. Thus, the issue of eliminating the Rapid Support Forces militia has become a non-issue even at the popular level, let alone at the level of the Sudanese military leadership.
Despite its low political awareness, the Rapid Support Militia and its political arm, the Progress Coordination, realize that the successive developments in the Sudanese arena today, especially after the failure of the Geneva negotiations, will not proceed “in the future” according to what was planned for them due to their lack of the Sudanese popular incubator that represents most of the national voices and which they lost after April 15, 2023, and there is no forgiveness for what was committed after that, even if we assume that the militia and its protégé found international support to support their release to manage Sudan after Al-Bashir, then by what popular consensus will they rule? With what political vision will they formulate their regional and international presence and with what vision will they implement it? It is not possible to accept the participation of those who raised arms against the state and threatened the security and safety of its civil and military institutions, and contributed and continues to contribute to the eradication of its history, the demolition of its foundations, the uprooting of its people and the obliteration of its civilization after accepting to be a wrecking ball in the hands of parties that know nothing about Sudan except its name. The statement of the American envoy “Tom Perriello” came when he said “There is no future for the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan, and the Sudanese army is an institution with a history”, and the statement of the American Secretary of State “Anthony Blinken” that the Rapid Support Forces committed ethnic cleansing and crimes against civilians, confirming that vision that has become an obsession besieging the militia movement and those who revolve in its orbit, and reminding them whenever they forget that the validity of their use is about to end after their failure to achieve what is wanted from them. Given the growing popular consensus in support of the Sudanese Armed Forces, which was accompanied by the progress of military operations and the army’s success in continuing to harvest the heads of the Rapid Support Militia leaders, the last of whom was Colonel “Fayez Hamid”, the commander of the militia’s operations in West Kordofan, and the recovery of the “Al-Lakandi” area in Sennar State, and the defeat of the militia from the “Benzaga” and “Jalqni” areas south of Singa, and the liberation of the “Al-Balihab” area on the outskirts of Jebel Moya, I believe that the Al-Dagalo militia will work to strengthen its presence and will head in the coming time in two directions:
- Announcing a new “extensive” regional tour by the commander of the Rapid Support Militia “Hemeti”, or delegations representing the militia to some neighboring countries in the region, promoting the militia government that is alleged to have been launched in the areas under its control, to weaken the popular consensus around the Sudanese National Army, but if that tour happens, its impact will not exceed its predecessor that happened last January, as it is a marketing and promotion tour, nothing more, a paid tour for whoever will receive the militia delegation, but it Certainly it does not establish a future political phase in Sudan, and this is a fact that the militia leader “Hemeti” realizes despite his shallow and low political awareness. All of Sudan’s regional neighboring countries, without exception, realize the danger of Hemeti’s cross-border political project that aims to undermine the concept of the nation state in Africa. Consequently, it will allow other African ethnicities to demand their historical projects, “the Greater Tutsi State” and “the Greater Fulani”, and consequently, these countries will reconsider their security calculations and future vision for their relationship with Khartoum.
Developing the level of their efforts to obtain more advanced military equipment to intensify their military operations and attack areas under the control of the Sudanese army in an attempt to achieve a quick victory, in light of the failure of the American envoy to achieve his priority of putting an end to foreign support for the warring Sudanese parties.
To enhance the presence of the Sudanese military establishment in Africa, it is proposed to do the following:
- Open a line of cooperation and coordination with “Sant’Egidio”, an international organization active in conflict areas, especially in Africa, and is currently carrying out extensive activity in the Central African Republic to revive the “Political Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation in the Central African Republic” or what is internationally known as the “Khartoum Agreement”, which was born and implemented under “Sudanese” sponsorship in 2018-2019. This organization is currently facing a major difficulty represented by its inability to achieve full consensus between the government of President “Faustin Todera” and armed movements such as the “Movement for Peace in Central Africa” or what is known in French as “Mouvement pour la Paix en Centrafrique”, and it seeks to communicate and cooperate with Khartoum to help it in this. Therefore, the Sudanese leadership has several options to force Bangui to change its position on the Sudanese crisis or at least reduce the intensity of its security coordination with the Rapid Support Militias.
- If Bangui insists on the security and intelligence commitment supporting the Rapid Support Forces militias, Khartoum can do the following:
- Reconsider responding to Bangui’s attempts with “Sant’Egidio” seeking to develop a roadmap to achieve complete peace in the Central African Republic, which will not be achieved except with the approval of General “Bobo”, head of the “3R” group, “Ali Darasss”, head of the “UPC”, and “Noureddine Adam”, head of the “FPRC”, through the proximity of these aforementioned figures to the Sudanese security institutions, and their personal relationships with senior Sudanese security leaders.
- Focusing on the file of “Firmin Ngrebada”, the former Prime Minister of the Central African Republic, “who can be used in the future”, and one of the most important figures nominated to lead the Central African Republic, and this is what President “Tudera” fears, as evidenced by his recent request to Moscow to reduce the personal protection staff it provides for “Firmin”, which was met with a categorical refusal, in a clear indication of the validity of the concerns of the presidential establishment in Bangui about the impact of the Russian role on the future political system in the Central African Republic.
- Within the framework of the consultation and discussion that the US administration seeks with the Sudanese leadership, it is necessary to respond to the statement of the US envoy to Sudan, “Tom Perriello”, who said, “The Commander of the Sudanese Army, Mr. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, was open to the participation of the army in the Geneva talks, but there are negative political forces that hinder him.” Here, a clear message must be sent to the American side that the December Revolution overthrew the Salvation regime in order to seize the citizen’s right to a decent life, and impose a new political reality that accommodates all parties with different orientations, and not to impose an exclusionary system that excludes the sons of one country for their ideological affiliations, even if their scientific competence and practical experience exceed their counterparts from other parties.
- This exclusion that is intended to be implemented will not be achieved in the Sudan of the future, and here lies the moral value of the December Revolution, which some parties do not want to realize for a popular revolution that took place for a country that accommodates everyone, in which there is no room for betraying and excluding the citizen and obscuring the minds that the country needs in the most critical stage it is experiencing, even if their intellectual affiliations differ, as there is no point or room for a culture of exclusion in peoples who have succeeded in To wrest its dignity, no matter how much the waves of returning to square one escalate.
- Forming “media” and “political” teams led by qualified Sudanese cadres to demonstrate the danger of the cross-border political Rapid Support Project “the extended Arab state” that aims to undermine the concept of the nation state in Africa, and it is proposed to direct this warning to African public opinion first, in cooperation with the Rwandan media machine, considering that “Kigali” is leading the regional security strategy in the African continent, and thus it will see that the Rapid Support Militia project is a project that will destroy its advanced efforts in dedicating the success of the “Regional Security Strategy” that Rwandan President “Paul Kagame” is counting on, and this is what will contribute to strongly re-proposing the African Security Alliance scenario, and this scenario that Rwanda has been seeking for some time to include the countries of Central and Sahel Africa in it during the next five years, which means enhancing the opportunities available to besiege the activities of the Rapid Support Militia and eliminate it.
God bless the Sudanese army and unite its word,,,,
Dr. Amina Al Arimi
Emirati researcher in African affairs
No Comments