On September 23, the White House issued a statement highlighting U.S. support for Sudanese peace in a meeting with the UAE leader while neglecting the UAE’s backing of the RSF, a force implicated in severe human rights abuses. This dissonance raises critical questions about U.S. accountability and sincerity in addressing the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Sudan, as millions suffer from the conflict, exacerbated by the UAE’s actions.
On September 23, 2023, the White House published a statement summarizing a bilateral meeting between President Biden and Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the President of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The statement highlighted the strong partnership between the U.S. and the UAE, specifically noting their mutual concern regarding the ongoing crisis in Sudan. The declaration emphasized the absence of a military solution and the necessity for accountability concerning war crimes and atrocities committed during the conflict. However, this commendable rhetoric runs starkly contrary to the reality of the UAE’s involvement in Sudan. Reports indicate that the UAE is providing support to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a group known for its systemic violence and atrocities, including widespread sexual violence and ethnic cleansing. The RSF’s actions have led to the destabilization and suffering of millions within Sudan, particularly in regions such as Darfur, where it continues to exert control over civilians and humanitarian access. Moreover, as reported by the New York Times on September 21, the UAE’s actions extend beyond mere support; it is allegedly financing the RSF, supplying arms and drones, all while presenting itself as a benefactor providing humanitarian assistance. This duality of promoting aid while exacerbating the crisis significantly undermines the credibility of humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent. The impact on Sudanese civilians has been catastrophic, with around twelve million people displaced and millions facing starvation as a result of the ongoing conflict and failure to secure humanitarian access. The White House’s statement raises important questions regarding the United States’ stance on the crisis, particularly when it appears to endorse the UAE’s contradictory actions. How can the U.S. hold both parties accountable for their transgressions, when the American government itself is perceived to be aligned with entities contributing to the problem? Is the United States genuinely committed to promoting peace, or is it inadvertently endorsing the UAE’s deceptive narrative? In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 24, following his meeting with Sheikh bin Zayed, President Biden reiterated a critical position, urging the international community to cease arming the warring factions in Sudan and to advocate for an end to the violence. It remains to be seen whether this message was conveyed privately to the Emirati leader, especially given the stark contrast between the public statements and the ongoing crisis in Sudan. The juxtaposition of Biden’s UN remarks with the White House’s earlier statement paints a troubling picture of potential complicity or neglect regarding the realities on the ground, which could be perceived as a betrayal of the Sudanese populace who are suffering immensely due to this conflict.
The complexity of the Sudanese conflict, particularly the violent actions perpetrated by the RSF, has drawn significant international concern and condemnation. The RSF, emanating from the Janjaweed militia responsible for atrocities in Darfur, operates with impunity, engaging in ethnic cleansing and severe human rights abuses. The UAE’s involvement, which is purportedly aimed at supporting humanitarian efforts, presents a façade that contradicts its support of a group notorious for its crimes. Understanding this backdrop is essential for grasping the implications of U.S. foreign policy decisions concerning Sudan and the UAE’s role in the region.
In conclusion, the mixed messages emanating from Washington reflect a troubling lack of coherence in U.S. foreign policy regarding the crisis in Sudan. While public statements advocate for peace and accountability, the underlying realities of UAE support for the RSF challenge the sincerity of these claims. As the humanitarian situation deteriorates, it is imperative for the U.S. to reassess its partnerships and align its rhetoric with actions that genuinely support the Sudanese people in their struggle against violence and starvation.
Original Source: www.cfr.org
