After more than a year of internal conflict, peace talks between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary group began on August 14th in Geneva. The discussions are the first phase in a process that will be followed by further dialogues, unable to address more urgently-needed ceasefire overhauls due to focus instead being placed on addressing the war’s heavy toll upon civilians. The fighting, which broke out in April 2023, has displaced over 8 million Sudanese. Besides the widespread displacement, the war has resulted in famine and disease that have only furthered the suffering of great numbers of Sudanese.

While the RSF, headed by Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo, agreed to join the Geneva talks, the SAF under General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan did not. Al-Burhan said, “We are not going back… we do now surrender, and no negotiation,” setting a definite opposition to the peace talks. According to two U.S. officials, the SAF has resisted and declined them so far, though they were adamant of pushing ahead with discussions on potential arrangements in place by top diplomats between Pretoria and Washington. U.S. special envoy for Sudan, Tom Perriello, expressed the challenges by saying, “We’ve had extensive engagement with the SAF but they have not yet given us an affirmation.” Plans of action will continue to be drafted to reduce violence. U.N. deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said earlier in response to a question about USAID’s decision ro halt assistance to areas outside FAF-controlled territories that this is a critical issue. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Doctors Without Borders both criticized this inaction as a “humanitarian disaster” for obstructing life-saving help by attacking healthcare facilities.

As the Geneva talks commence, alleviating immediate humanitarian problems among the public is still in people’s minds. There is no possibility of a ceasefire right now, but the talks are an important means toward ending hostilities. In this regard, the support of international entities and mediators like the U.N. or the U.S. is key to keeping these conversations alive until deadlocks between both parties cease. The future of peace and security in Sudan depends upon the success of these initiatives, and both parties will need to be willing to engage one another.

Sudan has a complex war-stricken history. After two lengthy civil wars with what became South Sudan finally ended in secession by referendum on July 9, 2011, the current conflict has its roots in the competing loyalties of SAF and RSF commanders. That rivalry between the two groups boiled over in 2019 when they ended up overthrowing President Omar al-Bashir together, only to fall out with each other during a deadly power struggle for the control of the state and resources. International actors have also contributed to a complex web surrounding the conflict with various foreign powers supporting one group or another. Saudi Arabia and Egypt support the SAF, while the RSF is backed by the UAE. Russia, too has been complicit in this enterprise as an enabler of the SAF through arms and gear or a vendor holding out on supplies for its leverage over strategic resources. Such intervention from abroad has only dragged on the war and made it more vicious as both of the fighting forces wanted to take hold of power.

The humantarian issues in Sudan are more urgent than ever, in light of the contemporary ongoing conflict. Failure to address the violence and humanitarian crisis will only add to regional instability, resulting in even more displacement and human suffering. The Geneva talks are unlikely to lead to a practical solution, but it is important to start somewhere.