Sudanese anti-war forces reject Burhan dialogue plan

ADDIS ABABA – Sudanese political and civil forces opposed to the war rejected on Sunday an initiative for an internal Sudanese dialogue backed by army chief and Sovereignty Council head Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, saying it did not represent a genuine path to peace and proposing an alternative process built around three simultaneous tracks.

The position was announced at the end of two days of consultations in Addis Ababa involving Sudanese groups that describe themselves as anti-war and unaffiliated with either side of the conflict, which entered its fourth year in April.

The meeting sought to unify their approach to ending the war and relaunching an independent political process outside the polarisation between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

Participants included representatives of the Sudanese Declaration of Principles, the Popular Congress Party founded by the late Islamist politician Hassan al-Turabi and headed by Ali al-Haj, the National Umma Party led by Mubarak al-Fadel, as well as civil society organisations, women’s and youth networks and independent public figures.

The groups adopted a joint position paper titled “The Peace Process We Want”, explicitly rejecting Burhan’s call for dialogue from inside Sudan.

The initiative, they said, was “not a real peace process”.

The groups argued that launching dialogue from areas controlled by one of the warring parties risked producing an unbalanced political process and could entrench Sudan’s existing geographical and political divisions, effectively turning military control on the ground into a permanent political reality.

The Addis Ababa meeting instead proposed three simultaneous and integrated tracks: humanitarian action, a ceasefire and security arrangements, and a political process.

The three tracks would operate under an independent and mutually agreed framework intended to prevent either side of the war from dominating the political process, while separating urgent humanitarian needs from security arrangements and negotiations over the future of the state.

The proposed political process would include three main components on an equal basis: civilian and political forces that are not aligned with either side of the war, forces aligned with the army, and forces aligned with the RSF.

But the document called for the army and RSF to be confined to the humanitarian and security tracks and excluded from directly determining the outcome of the political track.

The position reflects an effort by Sudan’s anti-war civilian forces to prevent the military factions from retaining a decisive role in determining the country’s future system of government.

The groups also called for the dissolved National Congress Party of former President Omar al-Bashir, the Islamic Movement and their affiliated organisations to be excluded from the peace process.

The proposal draws in part on the “Sudanese Declaration of Principles for Building a New Nation”, signed by political, civilian and armed groups in Nairobi in December 2025. The declaration affirms that there is “no military solution in Sudan” and calls for an end to the war and a transition towards a new state based on civilian principles.

The declaration was signed by former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, the National Umma Party founded by former prime minister Sadiq al-Mahdi, the Sudanese Congress Party led by Omar al-Digair, the Federal Gathering led by Babiker Faisal, and the Sudan Liberation Movement led by Abdel Wahid Mohamed Nur.

The signatories have sought to present themselves as an independent civilian bloc separate from the warring parties, amid a deep political divide between forces that view the army as representing state institutions and those opposed to the continuation of the war and calling for a political settlement that gives neither military faction an advantage in determining Sudan’s future.

The Addis Ababa meeting also called for regional and international efforts to end the war to be brought together under a coordinated framework, with the aim of increasing pressure on both sides to halt the fighting.

The groups agreed to establish a joint committee to develop their understandings and coordinate their positions, in an effort to overcome the fragmentation that has characterised civilian and political initiatives and build a more cohesive bloc for any future negotiations.

There was no immediate comment from the Sudanese authorities on the position announced by the Sudanese Declaration of Principles forces.

Burhan announced on August 14 that he supported an initiative put forward by a group of Sudanese men and women to prepare for an inclusive Sudanese dialogue to be held inside the country.

He said the initiative aimed to bring together political and community forces and place the suffering of Sudanese citizens and their right to peace at the centre of the process.

Burhan said the group had asked the state to provide the guarantees needed for the dialogue and the participation of its various parties.

He agreed to provide logistical support as well as legal, political and security guarantees, while stressing that the state would not organise the dialogue or determine its agenda or outcomes.

The competing initiatives highlight an unresolved dispute over who should lead Sudan’s next political phase, where dialogue should take place, which forces should participate and, most importantly, what role the army and RSF should play in any process aimed at ending the war.

The conflict, which began in April 2023, has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, killing tens of thousands of people and displacing or forcing about 13 million people to flee their homes, according to UN and international estimates.

Repeated efforts to halt the fighting through regional mediation and international initiatives have failed to produce a comprehensive settlement, with disagreements persisting over ceasefire conditions, post-war arrangements, the future of Sudan’s military establishment and the role of civilian forces.