Sudan’s anti-war coalition calls for immediate humanitarian truce

A humanitarian truce is a temporary, unconditional pause in fighting. Its immediate purpose is to protect civilians and allow essential aid to move safely. It differs from a permanent peace agreement because it does not by itself resolve the conflict, address its root causes, or establish a lasting political system.

In Sudan, civilian and political groups asked for such a truce as the first priority. They linked it to two practical goals: ensuring humanitarian assistance and creating space for peace talks. The proposed framework places a temporary cease-fire alongside aid delivery and comprehensive political dialogue.

The truce would be an emergency measure, not the final settlement. The groups want broader negotiations to build an inclusive peace and a sustainable democratic civilian transition. They also called for pressure on the warring parties, an end to external support, and accountability for atrocities.

The main armed groups fighting in Sudan are the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. The war began after a power struggle between their leaders. Their fighting has displaced millions and created a severe humanitarian crisis.

The truce appeal came from Sudanese civilian and political groups opposed to the war. Their delegation included former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and met the African Union’s high-level mediation mechanism in Addis Ababa. Coalition leader Shehab Ibrahim described the delegation’s proposed framework.

These civilian groups want a Sudanese-led peace process rather than a settlement controlled by the armed parties alone. They called for civilian forces to help design and lead negotiations under fair criteria. They also support an independent civilian anti-war movement that does not align with either side.

Sudan’s humanitarian crisis is described as severe. The conflict has displaced millions of people and disrupted the conditions needed for safety, aid delivery, and political life. The article gives no exact total, so “millions” is the most specific figure available from the source.

The displacement followed fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces. That fighting began on April 15, 2023, after a power struggle between the leaders of the two forces. The civilian groups said an immediate truce was needed to protect people affected by the war.

The scale of displacement strengthens the case for rapid humanitarian action. A temporary halt could help aid organizations reach civilians, while broader talks could address the conflict’s causes. The coalition also urged stronger pressure on those obstructing peace and an end to external support fueling the war.

An immediate truce would pause the violence long enough to protect civilians and support humanitarian operations. The civilian groups also see it as a bridge toward peace, because people cannot safely receive aid or join negotiations while fighting continues.

Their statement identifies two direct benefits: protecting civilians and ensuring aid delivery. Coalition leader Shehab Ibrahim placed a temporary cease-fire, humanitarian assistance, and comprehensive political dialogue in parallel. This design connects physical safety with relief work and political action.

The article does not list specific aid agencies or supplies. It does show that the groups want mediators to press the warring parties and stop outside support fueling the conflict. If respected, a truce could reduce immediate harm and help prepare a Sudanese-led process addressing the crisis’s root causes.

The coalition’s core idea is that a cease-fire, humanitarian assistance, and political dialogue solve different parts of the same crisis. The cease-fire reduces immediate danger. Aid responds to urgent civilian needs. Political dialogue addresses the conflict’s root causes and future governance.

Shehab Ibrahim said the three tracks must proceed simultaneously. The proposed framework therefore combines a temporary cease-fire, humanitarian assistance, and comprehensive political dialogue. A cease-fire without aid could leave civilians unsupported. Aid without political talks could relieve suffering without creating a path out of war.

The coalition warned that treating the tracks separately would complicate the conflict’s resolution. It wants dialogue to establish an inclusive peace and sustainable democratic civilian transition. The groups also agreed to create a joint preparatory committee to organize agendas, participants, venues, and wider engagement with international facilitators.

These organizations are helping create and support an international mediation framework. The African Union hosted the meeting and provided its high-level mediation mechanism. The United Nations, IGAD, and European Union participated through named envoys or representatives. Norway and Germany attended as observers.

The meeting brought civilian groups together with the Quintet mechanism in Addis Ababa. Participants included U.N. personal envoy Ramtane Lamamra, African Union envoy Mohamed Ibn Chambas, IGAD representatives, and European Union special representative Annette Weber. The sides agreed to form a joint preparatory committee.

That committee will set an agenda, identify participants, choose venues, and expand contact with international facilitators. The groups also urged the Quad, Quintet, and Troika to coordinate under one framework. They want mediators to increase pressure on warring parties, halt external support, and support a Sudanese-led process.

Civilian control of the military means elected or civilian political authorities guide security institutions and national decisions. After a civil war, this matters because military dominance can prevent an inclusive political settlement. The coalition connects civilian leadership with Sudan’s democratic transition and the rights to security and freedom.

The groups called for civilian forces to design and lead the peace process under fair criteria. They want to prevent any one party from dominating negotiations. They also stressed that independent military decision-making must be protected from the economic base of the former regime.

The proposed process would discuss constitutional structures and governance arrangements in broader negotiations. Its stated goal is an inclusive peace and sustainable democratic civilian transition. The coalition also rejected legitimacy for authorities created by the war and called for completing the path of the December Revolution, which led to Omar al-Bashir’s overthrow in April 2019.