The civil war in Sudan is nearing its two year mark as former allies turned enemies, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and paramilitary group the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), continue to engage in a brutal conflict which has left Sudan, according to the UN, as “the most devastating humanitarian and displacement crisis in the world.” Whilst currently the SAF are progressing to take control of the Sudanese capital of Khartoum for the first time since the civil war, the impact of the fighting on civilians has been massive. Since the fighting began, over 12 million civilians have been displaced from their homes, around a fifth of the population. The culmination of targeted attacks from both sides, famine and the collapse of healthcare facilities, has seen approximately 150,000 civilians dead in 22 months of fighting. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has described the situation in Sudan as a “nightmare”, with more than 30 million Sudanese civilians needing humanitarian aid. The fighting has seen both sides accused of committing war crimes, with women being particularly vulnerable due to the mass cases of sexual violence. Despite Khartoum close to coming under SAF control, an end to the war is unfortunately not guaranteed. In fact, as the capital is coming closer and closer to being under control of the Armed Forces, the RSF is tightening its grip on Darfur, a region in western Sudan. With frequent attacks from the RSF on Sudan’s largest refugee camp, Zamzam, it is evident that a continuation in the war effort is unlikely to guarantee a quick peace, stopping much needed humanitarian aid entering the country.

The rivalry between the SAF and RSF originated from both sides wanting a larger part to play in the country’s post-dictatorship leadership. This reason alone is nowhere near good enough to justify the war they have created. Whilst they are currently facing off against one another, they did work together to overthrow their dictator, and could do so again to institute a real democracy.

Sudan’s previous leader, Omar al-Bashir, took control of the country in 1989 after seizing power from the democratically elected Umma Party. His subsequent 30 year reign of authoritarianism was fueled with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. With mass protests in the streets, the SAF and RSF worked together to finally take control. When they did, there was hope that democracy would return to the country, yet these hopes were quickly lost when tension between the two military groups rose to what would eventually become the civil war. Since then, the SAF and RSF have been accused of the very same war crimes and crimes against humanity that al-Bashir had been accused of during his regime.

Sudan’s problems however, would not simply go away with the end of war. To aid Sudan’s humanitarian crisis, it is estimated that billions of dollars in funding need to be sent to stop the mass numbers of civilians dying. The current amount of aid sent to Sudan is vastly too low for how much is needed to keep its population alive. With US President Donald Trump committing to completely defund USAID and all of the investment it provided, the already desperate Sudanese population will be worse off.

Ultimately, because both sides of this civil war are as deeply entrenched as they are, it is unlikely that either the SAF or RSF would be willing to give up. Furthermore, as the balance of power is relatively even, fighting looks set to continue. In the short term, an immediate ceasefire must be established in order to allow vital aid to enter the country and stop the humanitarian crisis currently being experienced by the Sudanese civilians. This could hopefully be achieved through pressure from the international community, with particular emphasis from neighbouring countries and the African Union. However, to secure a long-term peace, both sides would have to be forced towards peace talks, disarmament, and eventually a merging of both groups into the military. To assure a long lasting peace, the SAF and RSF would both eventually have to relinquish power in order to institute a real elective democracy.