Can Geneva Bring Peace to Sudan?

Peace talks between the two warring sides in Sudan, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), have been ongoing for a week now in Geneva, Switzerland. The World Health Organization (WHO) has said there are "a few promising signs" emerging from the talks, perhaps showing them to be taken more seriously than previous peace talks..Promising Signs.The UN Secretary General's personal envoy for Sudan, Ramtane Lamamra, met with delegations from both the RSF and the SAF in Geneva in recent days. The very existence of these talks shows a notable step of progress towards developing a peace deal to put an end to the war in Sudan that has been ongoing for more than a year..However, while in these talks, Lamamra met with both the RSF and the SAF, he did not meet with them at the same time. As such, the RSF and the SAF have yet to meet face-to-face in the talks, representing a large divide that still needs to be addressed. The two sides are not scheduled to meet with each other, and any meeting between them is unlikely to take place during the current talks..Lamamra stated that "the teams engaged intensively on the two key items discussed during these talks: humanitarian assistance and protection of civilians," two topics of the utmost importance as the humanitarian crisis in Sudan continues to worsen..The talks are expected to continue, with no end date scheduled..Shible Sahbani, the WHO's representative in Sudan, stated that there have been "a few promising signs" from the talks.."Let's wait for the coming hours and days, and we hope that… if we don't get a ceasefire, at least we can get the protection of civilians and the opening of humanitarian corridors." -Shible Sahbani, the WHO's representative to Sudan, while speaking in Port Sudan.The talks come after repeated efforts to restart ceasefire negotiations that broke down soon after the start of the war last year..Genuine Peace or Political Maneuvering?.Throughout the war in Sudan, numerous ceasefires and humanitarian pauses have been established. All, thus far, have broken. Some of them broke within hours, and some of them broke before they were even implemented..Most of these talks were hosted in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where the US and the Saudis attempted to mediate the crisis and bring about peace between the two sides. Despite the repeated breaking of ceasefires, the US and Saudi Arabia continually attempted to host talks. Eventually, as it became clear neither side was truly committing to the talks, they broke down and have not been held since. Three sets of private talks were reportedly held in Bahrain between the two sides in January; however, neither side acknowledged the talks, and they remained unconfirmed..Since the break down of the Jeddah talks, both sides have announced their openness to come back to the table. The RSF has, at times, stated its willingness to hold talks and even sign a ceasefire without conditions..However, the SAF had put forward several preconditions before they would even agree to hold talks. It is worth noting that these preconditions, most prominently the demand that the RSF withdraw from urban centers it seized during the war, have not been met despite the ongoing talks..Given the SAF's well-established preconditions, it can be seen that the RSF's previously stated willingness to participate in talks and sign a ceasefire is likely political maneuvering to bolster its position. It is likely that the RSF knew the SAF would refuse both talks and a ceasefire, and so putting itself forward as the side calling for genuine peace, when they knew there was no risk of this peace actually being created, betters its image as it attempts to legitimize itself to the world as a key player in Sudan's politics and its future..This attempt at legitimization is perfectly evidenced by the diplomatic tour that RSF leader Mohamed 'Hemedti' Hamdan Dagalo took in January, when he met with several different African leaders in his first trip out of the country since the start of the war..The RSF's lack of genuine commitment can be seen in outside attempts to bring about a ceasefire. During the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, the UN Security Council passed a resolution demanding a ceasefire for the duration of Ramadan..This was ignored by both sides, who continued fighting regardless of the ceasefire order..However, the fact that both sides are participating in talks is significant, as this is the first public indication of them doing so since November. Moreover, the Geneva meetings have come without the SAF's preconditions having been met..There are a number of potential reasons why both sides have now agreed to talks. Namely, Sudan's humanitarian crisis is rapidly approaching a breaking point, if not already past it. While this is, of course, a possible reason for why the talks are now occurring, neither side has shown particular concern for civilian populations, with both sides' attacks regularly leading to a multitude of civilian casualties. In addition, the RSF has recently, amidst ongoing talks, enacted a state of siege on the Sudanese city of Sennar, which threatens to plunge the city into famine as they rapidly run out of food supplies, and the RSF loots local production. Also worth noting are the efforts both sides have taken at different moments to divert, delay, or disrupt humanitarian aid in the nation..Additionally, it is possible that the SAF has realized that their preconditions are unlikely to be met. Throughout the course of the war, the RSF has steadily gained ground, including numerous key areas, and has forced the SAF into increasingly disadvantageous positions. It is likely that the SAF has avoided talks in the past while it attempted to recover from a position of weakness, as any talks that occur would hold the RSF in a far more elevated position than the SAF wishes. While they certainly would never publicly announce this to be the case, this would be a significant internal admission by the SAF..Further, it is possible that outside pressure has finally managed to get the RSF and the SAF to hold talks. However, given the extreme resistance that both sides have shown to outside pressures on the matter, it is unlikely this is the case..On the Backdrop of Violence.While the two sides are meeting with the UN in Geneva, the war in Sudan continues, along with its rapidly deteriorating humanitarian crisis. UN reports in recent weeks and months have estimated that 25 million people, half of the nation's population, require aid. Of these, 18 million suffer from acute hunger..In addition, more than 10 million people in Sudan are internally displaced, with over two million having fled the country. The majority were displaced after the war began on April 15th of last year, though a notable number have been displaced during Sudan's previous conflicts..Unfortunately, due to a supreme lack of information-gathering resources and the general chaos of the situation, no accurate estimate for casualties in the war exists. However, according to UN estimates, tens of thousands of people have been killed, with tens of thousands more injured..Both the RSF and the SAF frequently bomb civilian areas indiscriminately, leading to constant and high civilian casualties. Further, the RSF has committed several ethnic-based massacres, primarily against populations in Darfur, such as the Masalit and other non-Arabs..The hunger crisis is worsened by several RSF sieges on key cities, such as El Fasher in North Darfur, in the west of the nation. The city has witnessed clashes since early April, and been under assault by the RSF since early May. According to the WHO, approximately 800,000 people are trapped in the city as the RSF and the SAF vie for control of the key city..Similar situations can be seen in many different areas of Sudan, where the war has created extreme hunger for many..Little aid enters the nation. This is, in part, due to the fighting, but aid organizations operating in the country also suffer from a serious lack of funding. Thus, limited supplies and numerous bureaucratic impediments make their work monumentally more difficult..A myriad of nations and humanitarian organizations have warned that the only way Sudan will not enter into an irreversible crisis, one that could potentially fracture the nation, is through a ceasefire and the admittance of a significant amount of humanitarian aid..The ongoing talks will provide a good clue into if those warnings will be heard or not.