Sudan's Initiative Before The UN Security Council: A National Vision For Peace And A Test Of UN Partnership

Dr. Kamel Idris' address to the UN Security Council on Monday, 22 December, came at a decisive moment in Sudan's modern history-one defined by protracted war, a deepening humanitarian catastrophe, and mounting threats to state unity and regional stability. The speech went beyond recounting the human toll of the conflict that erupted in April 2023. It articulated a comprehensive Sudanese political initiative for ending the war, restoring the state, and building a sustainable peace grounded in national ownership, justice, sovereignty, and reconstruction.

The initiative is anchored in the Roadmap presented earlier this year by the Chairman of the Sovereign Council, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, to the UN Secretary-General. Its key pillars can be summarized as follows:

1. National Ownership as the Foundation of Any Solution

Dr. Idris stressed that Sudan's crisis can only be resolved through an authentic national will. Externally imposed solutions or arrangements that bypass Sudanese actors have repeatedly proven counterproductive. In this context, the Sudanese government rejected the so-called“Quartet” framework-widely perceived as lacking neutrality-and instead favors an American–Saudi–Egyptian initiative, potentially supported by a broader regional safety net including Qatar and Türkiye.

The message to the international community was clear: Sudan seeks partnership, not tutelage. The role of the UN and regional actors should be supportive of Sudanese decision-making, not a substitute for it, with the African Union and the Arab League providing structured regional backing.

2. No Military Solution-Inclusive Political Dialogue Is the Only Path

Echoing the assessments of several Council members, the speech reaffirmed that military victory is unattainable. A comprehensive political dialogue remains the only viable route to ending the conflict and preventing state collapse. However, this dialogue must be Sudanese-owned and aimed not at temporary power-sharing, but at addressing the root causes of the crisis and restoring legitimate state authority.

3. Sequenced and Interlinked Priorities

The initiative adopts a clear, logical sequencing:
. A comprehensive ceasefire under joint international monitoring, coupled with the withdrawal of rebel forces from civilian and strategic sites.
. Unhindered humanitarian access to all affected populations, free from politicization or manipulation.
. Security, political, social, and economic arrangements, including:
. The implementation of security benchmarks such as cantonment, disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of Rapid Support Forces (RSF) fighters, in line with the Jeddah Agreement.
. A national political dialogue to restore constitutional legitimacy.
. Socio-economic reforms to stabilize the country and launch reconstruction.

These steps are mutually reinforcing; progress in one is contingent upon progress in the others, forming an integrated pathway toward sustainable peace and a civilian democratic transition.

4. The Humanitarian Dimension and Shared International Responsibility

The speech underscored Sudan's unprecedented humanitarian crisis and called for guaranteed humanitarian corridors and equitable aid delivery. Sudan, however, is not seeking sympathy, but a genuine sharing of responsibility, given the conflict's implications for regional and international security.

5. Halting the Flow of Weapons to Militias

A central point of consensus-both in the speech and among Council members-was that continued arms flows to militias are a primary driver of the war's prolongation. Dr. Idris urged the activation and enforcement of UN Security Council Resolution 1591 and accountability for all violators. Peace, he argued, is impossible while external actors continue to fuel the conflict.

6. No Peace Without Justice

The initiative places justice at the core of peacebuilding. Ignoring grave violations against civilians would only produce a fragile and reversible peace. Ending impunity is both a moral and legal imperative, essential to rebuilding trust in the state and preventing future atrocities.

7. The RSF's Rejection of the Initiative

The Rapid Support Forces' swift rejection of the initiative reflects a fundamental contradiction between the proposal and the militia's project. The initiative seeks to restore the state's monopoly over the use of force and links political settlement to accountability and transitional justice-directly threatening the RSF's existence as a parallel military-economic structure.

This rejection deepens the RSF's legal and political exposure, particularly in light of escalating documentation of mass killings, forced displacement, sexual violence, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure-acts increasingly characterized internationally as war crimes and crimes against humanity. The refusal to engage in a justice-based political process reinforces perceptions that the militia seeks to legitimize violence rather than pursue peace, accelerating its international isolation and raising the prospect of expanded sanctions, legal action, and potential terrorist designation.

8. Sudan's Message to the Security Council

Sudan's message was unequivocal:
. It does not seek rhetorical sympathy.
. It does not seek symbolic condemnations.
. It seeks a genuine UN and regional partnership that respects Sudanese sovereignty and supports ending the war, facilitating the return of displaced populations, and advancing reconstruction and national recovery.

The initiative offers a coherent equation: a nationally owned political solution, a credible ceasefire with security arrangements, urgent humanitarian support, an end to militia armament, and justice without impunity.

9. A Test of UN Partnership

Ultimately, the initiative places the UN before a defining choice: to stand with the logic of state restoration or to continue managing the conflict. Supporting the initiative requires moving beyond cautious neutrality toward a principled partnership that upholds constitutional legitimacy, state authority, and accountability.

This is not merely a test of UN effectiveness, but of its moral and political credibility in Sudan-either as a partner in rebuilding the state, or as an actor perpetuating crisis management without a sustainable horizon.

MENAFN04012026005684012485ID1110553546