News

Sudan fighting commands attention. Can US correct its course?

From the war on terror to the genocide in Darfur, the United States has been interested in Sudan for more than three decades. In recent years, the U.S. has tried to balance its own security interests against often-stated American civic values: the promotion of democracy and buttressing of Sudan’s vibrant civil society.

But Washington’s “Asia pivot” and a certain “Sudan fatigue” have diluted U.S. attention to Sudan, analysts say, leading the U.S. to increasingly rely on partners in the region to do more of the diplomatic heavy lifting. Others say the U.S. has engaged in “wishful thinking” in deliberations with Sudanese leaders.

Why We Wrote This

To ease its pivot to Asia, the U.S. largely outsourced diplomacy in Sudan. Now, faced with the threat of worsening violence and instability, it must reassess its priorities. Can it achieve both peace and democracy for the Sudanese people?

“The U.S. has made a lot of mistakes in Sudan, not the least of which has been trusting the two generals who are now fighting each other to the death,” says Cameron Hudson, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“We need to focus first on humanitarian steps” and on helping “build a wall around the country to prevent weapons and fighters from coming in,” he says. “If we can keep the neighbors out of the fighting and cut off the flow of funding and arms to the two sides, then we can get back to thinking about a permanent peace.”

When fighting erupted in Sudan last month between the country’s armed forces and a powerful paramilitary group, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was in Vietnam, solidifying ties aimed at counterbalancing China’s growing dominance in Southeast Asia.

Suddenly Mr. Blinken’s press encounters were less about China and more about the safety of dozens of U.S. diplomats in Sudan and the fate of thousands of American citizens living there.

Then came questions about the potential for Sudan’s violence to expand into a full-blown civil war that could spill over into fragile neighboring countries and destabilize the entire Horn of Africa.

Why We Wrote This

To ease its pivot to Asia, the U.S. largely outsourced diplomacy in Sudan. Now, faced with the threat of worsening violence and instability, it must reassess its priorities. Can it achieve both peace and democracy for the Sudanese people?

Once again, the U.S. aim to pivot to Asia and shift military and diplomatic resources to the Indo-Pacific region was being stymied by events threatening American interests in the greater Middle East.

And now, with violence deepening across much of Sudan and a wider regional war threatening, the United States must turn to humanitarian priorities as well as steps to discourage neighboring countries from feeding the fighting and becoming embroiled in the war themselves, regional analysts say.

Previous ArticleNext Article