Washington Behind the Mask of Humanitarianism; America’s New Scenario for Influence in Sudan

Afghan Voice Agency (AVA) - International Service: With the start of any conflict or war, the United States of America always uses the humanitarian dimension as an excuse for its diplomatic interventions in line with its geopolitical interests. It seems that the Sudan case is no exception to this rule, because the US government fears a repeat of the Libya scenario in Sudan; a scenario that could threaten Washington’s interests on the African continent.

 

The Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar published a note on this subject by Wafa Ayoub, writing: “Following the fall of El Fasher, the capital of Darfur state, on October 26 at the hands of the “rapid support” forces, Masad Fares Boulos, the US President’s senior adviser on Arab and African affairs, announced that the United States would give the conflicting parties in Sudan a “final chance” before taking “measures” without clarifying the nature of these measures.”

 

Political deal

In this regard, an American delegation has traveled to Port Sudan, the interim capital of the Sudanese government, to continue talks between Washington and Khartoum; the trip followed meetings in Washington with Sudanese Foreign Minister Muhyiddin Salem.

 

American media reported that he had received proposals to conclude a political deal with the Trump administration; a deal within the framework of strategic relations that focuses on providing “incentives” to Washington in exchange for supporting the Khartoum government led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan in the future.

 

According to available information, the deal includes supporting Al-Burhan against the “Rapid Support” forces and placing the group on the list of terrorist organizations, in exchange for Sudan abandoning its eastward shift and cooperation with Russia, including an agreement to establish a naval base in the Red Sea.

 

Intensifying diplomatic efforts

 

The author continued: “While the dimensions of this deal are not yet clear, Washington, in cooperation with its partners in the Quartet including Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE, despite their different agendas in Sudan, is trying to consolidate its influence in the country and prevent Iranian influence; in particular, to prevent Iran from possibly using Sudanese ports to send weapons to the “Ansar Allah” movement in Yemen. Another goal of the United States is also to limit the influence of China and Russia in Sudan and throughout Africa.

 

The note continues: “Given Sudan’s geopolitical importance for Red Sea security, experts believe that Washington is seeking to prevent internal chaos and instability in the country in order to prevent the spread of influence by groups such as ISIS, especially given reports that the group’s activities have shifted to Africa after its defeat in Iraq and Syria.”

 

From the perspective of US interests in Africa, experts believe that the US government will not allow Sudan to become a “failed state,” as such a situation would threaten the stability of the African continent and, as a result, weaken Washington’s influence in the region.

 

Washington is likely to intensify its diplomatic efforts that it began before the fall of Al-Fasher, as Khartoum is part of Trump’s “comprehensive peace” plan for Gaza and is also one of the signatories of the Abraham Accords, which the US president is seeking to expand in the region.

 

Final Chance

Returning to the issue of the “measures” that the American advisor spoke about, it should be noted that Washington had previously imposed financial sanctions on Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the head of the Sovereign Council, and Mohammed Hamdan Daqlou “Hamidati,” the commander of the “Rapid Support” forces, as well as some companies, including Emirati ones.

 

However, Sudanese experts believe that these sanctions have been ineffective, because the war economy of the parties is managed by hidden networks and the US Treasury is unable to control it. They note that sanctions have rarely changed the positions of the Sudanese authorities in the past three decades. Therefore, the final question is: how will Washington implement its “measures” after the “final chance”?