According to the United Nations, Sudan’s ongoing conflict is on “the brink” of breaking out into a “full-scale civil war.” The conflict, which erupted between the Sudanese Armed Forces (S.A.F.) and the rebelling Rapid Support Forces (R.S.F.), has now been churning for 12 weeks. The deadliest incident as of July was an air raid on Omdurman, which health authorities report killed 22 individuals. For all that the indications that this fight can be de-escalated have thus far been weak, there is growing pressure that the summit in Cairo scheduled for July 13^th can peacefully resolve the conflict.

The R.S.F. “vehemently condemn the deliberate air strikes conducted by the extremist terrorist militia [of the S.A.F.].” The S.A.F., meanwhile, has attributed the attack to the R.S.F. This further contributes to the existing lack of clarity surrounding the situation, making it challenging for the international community to identify solutions.

Starting in the capital city Khartoum on April 15^th, Sudan’s conflict has spread beyond major cities like Omdurman and Khartoum to rural areas. Of particular concern is the violence’s extension to western Darfur, a region still dealing with the aftermath of war in 2003. Reports from residents indicate that the R.S.F. has targeted civilians along ethnic lines. In total, the health ministry reports that the conflict has killed at least 1,133 people.

Moreover, as U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has warned, the volatile region – including the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, and the Red Sea – is vulnerable to the escalating war’s spill-over, with approximately one out of four of the 2.9 million displaced people fleeing to neighbouring nations, worsening existing conditions of poverty. Guterres expressed deep concerns about the consistent intensification of the conflict and its potential to “destabiliz[e] the entire region.”

The U.N. has also voiced fears over the “alarming numbers” of sexual violence its local human rights office has reported. There have been reports of sexual violence against at least 57 women and girls, with one incident alone resulting in the rape of 20 women. 3 million women and girls in the area are already facing a crisis of violence, and the atrocities brought by the brewing conflict have compounded concerns, with the U.N. estimating that over a million more women and girls could be affected. The gravity of the situation prompted U.N. Under-Secretary General Martin Griffiths to describe it as “not just a humanitarian crisis … [but] a crisis of humanity.”

Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi promised on July 9^th that the summit in Cairo would “develop effective mechanisms” with the support of the international community, but the summit’s plan is to essentially renew the failed mediation attempts the United States and Saudi Arabia undertook in June. The ceasefire agreements reached in these past mediations have proven to be ineffective in the long term. Even if we were to ignore the agreements’ eventual deterioration, the relatively more successful initial ceasefire still witnessed reports of smaller-scale attacks in local neighborhoods.

I suggest that one critical shortcoming of the previous mediations, in addition to the difficulties inherent to restoring peace, is the United States’ and Saudi Arabia’s limited on-the-ground knowledge of the country’s situation and the parties involved. This lack of knowledge makes it challenging for outside forces to cater practical solutions to the local situation.

It is also challenging for insiders or involved parties to be transparent about the potential for negotiations. As a vital foreign ally to Sudan with a closer perspective on the country than the previous mediators, as well as greater influence on the decision-making processes of the S.A.F. and R.S.F., Egypt seems well placed to make a difference. However, the nation’s alliance with the Sudanese state also raises concerns about impartiality, potentially hindering progress.

Regardless, the international community should not take the U.S.’s and Saudi Arabia’s lack of success as an excuse to divert its attention away from a catastrophic conflict. Despite its diluted perspective, it is crucial that the world find a way to pressure Sudan to consider more peaceful solutions than all-out war. Additionally, pragmatism should not obstruct the provision of humanitarian aid. Even though providing aid does little to address the root causes of the conflict, the international community should facilitate humanitarian support to prevent further exacerbation of the situation, in addition to and at the same time as it addresses the root cause with local experts.