Sudan has accused the UAE of complicity in genocide linked to its support for the RSF amid a protracted civil war. The UAE views Sudan as vital for its resources and strategic placement. While allegations highlight the UAE’s complex involvement, experts believe the UAE’s powerful status may shield it from serious fallouts despite potential reputational damage.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been accused by Sudan of complicity in genocide, prompting the case to be filed at the International Court of Justice. This accusation has raised questions regarding the UAE’s involvement in Sudan’s protracted civil war and its support for the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which are engaged in conflict with the Sudanese regular army.
Sudan holds significant importance for the UAE, given its wealth of natural resources, including agricultural land, gas, and gold, positioning it as the third-largest producer of gold in Africa. Furthermore, Sudan’s strategic location bordering Libya, where the UAE supports rebel authorities, and its access to the Red Sea, a vital maritime route for oil transport, enhances its value to the UAE.
The political dynamics of Sudan became complex following a coup in 2021, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, known as Hemeti. Subsequently, a power struggle erupted between the two leaders, with regional powers like the UAE being accused of backing different factions.
According to Andreas Krieg, a specialist in Middle East security, the UAE’s primary goal in Sudan revolves around enhancing its political influence in a strategically significant nation. Emirati businesses view Sudan as an investment hub for resources and trade, leading to growing concerns over the UAE’s exploitation of the continent’s wealth, including notable gold smuggling practices.
The UAE has emerged as the largest buyer of Sudanese gold, a sector largely under the control of Daglo and linked with broader patterns of Emirati engagements with paramilitary forces across Africa. While the pursuit of gold appears to be a driving factor for the UAE, scholars contend that such a view is overly simplistic. Tornelli notes that the UAE’s objectives may also involve countering Saudi influence and addressing perceived threats from political Islam.
The historical ties between the UAE and Sudan’s military leadership trace back to their cooperation in Yemen as part of the Saudi-led coalition. Despite the existing alliances, rifts have developed between Saudi Arabia and the UAE, with support for Daglo indicating a deviation from traditional alignments. The ideological stance of the RSF against the Muslim Brotherhood also resonates with the UAE’s political framework that seeks to suppress such movements.
Unfortunately, both the RSF and the regular army have been implicated in war crimes throughout the ongoing conflicts, resulting in substantial loss of life and displacement. Last January, the United States accused the RSF of genocide, raising global awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan.
Following the filing of Sudan’s case at the ICJ, the UAE has dismissed the claims, branding them as a “publicity stunt.” While ICJ rulings hold legal weight, the enforcement power is limited, leaving potential reputational risks for the UAE. However, experts speculate that the UAE’s established financial and political standing may insulate it from significant consequences.
In summary, the UAE’s involvement in Sudan raises critical issues regarding its political objectives and military support for factions like the RSF amidst ongoing allegations of genocide. While the UAE seeks to strengthen its influence in this strategically positioned nation rich in resources, Sudan’s accusations and the subsequent case at the ICJ may affect the UAE’s international image, although its established power may mitigate severe repercussions.
Original Source: www.ndtv.com
