Sudan Peace Envoy Awaits Paramilitary Talks

The proposed meeting would bring the UN together with the political bloc aligned with Hemedti, the nickname of Gen. Mohamed Dagalo, who commands the Rapid Support Forces. It matters because the UN is trying to open diplomatic channels with all major sides in Sudan’s war and support a path toward civilian government.

UN envoy Pekka Haavisto said the organization had already met parties close to Sudan’s Armed Forces and an anti-war coalition led by former prime minister Abdalla Hamdok. He said the October meeting in Addis Ababa discussed the substance of a civilian government. Addis Ababa could also host the RSF-bloc meeting.

The talks remain uncertain. Haavisto gave only the phrase “before Christmas.” No date, time zone or venue has been set. The UN’s continuing wait shows that diplomacy is incomplete while fighting, hunger and fear continue across Sudan.

The Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, are a paramilitary force commanded by Gen. Mohamed Dagalo, known as Hemedti. Sudan’s regular military is the Sudanese Armed Forces, or SAF. The basic difference is institutional: the SAF is the country’s formal army, while the RSF operates as a separate armed organization.

That separation is central to the conflict. Since April 2023, the RSF and SAF have fought each other instead of acting under one national military command. The article reports abuses and dangers linked to both sides, including RSF drone strikes and arrests by SAF security cells in El Obeid.

The rivalry has blocked political progress. The United States says neither warring general should lead Sudan politically, while the UN and regional partners press for civilian rule. Talks with the RSF’s political bloc are therefore important, but the article gives no confirmed date for them.

The figures show a severe and fast-moving humanitarian crisis in Kalma, a displacement camp in South Darfur. Malnutrition is affecting thousands, and children are bearing an especially heavy burden. The reported numbers suggest that basic food and medical needs are far beyond normal camp capacity.

In October, Kalma recorded 2,750 malnutrition cases. About 20 children were hospitalized each day. Health centers also saw 200 to 300 patients daily for illnesses including malaria, typhoid and anemia. Camp representative Adam Rijal linked the crisis to falling aid, higher food prices and crop failure associated with El Niño.

The outlook is worsening. Rijal warned that conditions could deteriorate over the next three to six months and urged a 90-day humanitarian truce. The figures came from a camp representative and could not be independently verified, but they indicate intense pressure on food and health services.

A failure to negotiate would leave civilians exposed to the war’s immediate costs. The article describes fear of RSF drone strikes and SAF arrests in El Obeid, while Kalma camp faces malnutrition, disease and falling aid. Continued fighting would make those dangers harder to reduce and could deepen displacement.

Humanitarian access also depends on security and cooperation. Kalma’s representative called for a 90-day humanitarian truce because food prices are rising, crops have failed and aid is falling. Without a pause, medical centers may continue facing 200 to 300 patients daily, with about 20 children hospitalized each day. Relief agencies would have less room to reach vulnerable people safely.

Political efforts could suffer too. The UN, Quintet and Quad are pressing for civilian rule, but the UN has not yet met the RSF’s political bloc. Continued war would preserve the generals’ military influence and delay agreement on a civilian government. These consequences are risks, not confirmed forecasts.

The Quintet is made up of the United Nations, European Union, African Union, Arab League and Intergovernmental Authority on Development. The Quad consists of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United States and the United Arab Emirates. Both groups are diplomatic coalitions focused on Sudan’s political future.

Their shared goal is civilian rule rather than continued military leadership. The UN has already engaged parties close to the Sudanese Armed Forces and an anti-war coalition led by Abdalla Hamdok. It is still waiting to meet the political bloc allied with the RSF. The Quad adds regional and international pressure alongside the UN-led effort.

The United States has said neither of Sudan’s warring generals has a future in political leadership. A US envoy also called for a humanitarian truce and a broader arms embargo at the Security Council. These efforts aim to reduce fighting, improve aid access and create space for civilian government, but no agreement has been reached.

The source establishes only that the RSF and Sudanese Armed Forces began fighting in April 2023. It does not provide a detailed account of the trigger or explain why the war has continued. Those missing details matter because the conflict is not simply a dispute between ordinary political parties; it is a struggle between two powerful armed organizations.

Based on established background beyond this article, the immediate crisis grew from disagreement over a transition to civilian rule, especially when and how the RSF would be integrated into the regular army. The dispute involved competing military leaders, Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan of the SAF and Gen. Mohamed Dagalo of the RSF. Fighting began after tensions escalated in Khartoum.

The war has continued because no durable settlement has resolved control of the state, armed forces or political transition. Mediation has not produced a truce, and both sides retain military capacity. In this article, the UN is still seeking talks, while civilians face attacks, arrests, hunger and disease.

Civilian control means elected or constitutionally authorized civilian institutions—not generals—make national political decisions and oversee the armed forces. It matters because soldiers and paramilitary commanders possess organized coercive power. If they control government, elections, courts and public spending can be weakened, and political disagreements may be settled through force.

In a transition from military rule or civil war, civilian oversight can set clear chains of command, require security forces to obey the law and create accountability for abuses. It can also guide the integration or reform of rival forces. Sudan’s conflict shows the danger of divided armed power: the RSF and SAF have fought since April 2023, while the UN and international groups press for civilian rule.

Civilian control does not automatically end violence or guarantee democracy. It must be supported by credible institutions, public participation and protections for rights. In Sudan, the United States says neither warring general should lead politically, but talks and a political settlement remain unfinished.