Although overshadowed by the war in Iran, the ongoing conflict in Gaza, and a seemingly perpetual struggle between Russia and Ukraine, last month saw an end to at least one global hotspot. On June 27th, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) signed a peace deal designed and brokered by Washington. The objective? Ending the violence that has surged in Central Africa since Rwandan-backed rebels took two major cities in the DRC earlier this year.
While lasting peace in the Congo will doubtless require sustained effort, the deal is a clear win for the Trump administration in its first genuine engagement in Africa. And while peace talks have stagnated on other continents, the DRC-Rwanda deal represents an opportunity for the United States, as well as an opening for Washington to expand its African involvement to another key regional conflict, Sudan.
Today, the civil war in Sudan is widely considered the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. Since its start more than two years ago, the conflict between the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the de facto government’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) has remained largely out of the headlines. But their ongoing fight has had truly catastrophic consequences; over 150,000 Sudanese civilians are now dead, by some estimates. The war has displaced a staggering four million to neighboring countries, and nearly 25 million more now face acute hunger.
So far, though, Washington has been slow to act. The Trump administration, mirroring the unfortunate pattern of its predecessor, has largely ignored the worsening crisis, failing to even appoint special envoys either for Sudan itself or for the Horn of Africa region more broadly. It has also turned a blind eye to the role of the conflict’s external backers, particularly the support for the RSF being provided by the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Earlier this year, the US struck a deal to sell the UAE over $1.6 billion in weapons, without making mention of how Abu Dhabi regularly supplies money, weapons, and drones to a group accused of genocide.
Yet securing peace in Sudan is vital. The crisis is critical to American interests in the region. Continued instability there risks further fueling the threat of Islamist terrorism, which is already surging on the continent. After all, Sudan in the past has served as a base for terrorists, most notably al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden and his cohort. Preventing such a resurgence is quite clearly in the US interest. Continued fighting is also harmful to global commercial interests, given Sudan’s strategic location atop the Red Sea. Yet another cause for concern is the possibility that the war may merge with other neighboring crises, such as the one taking place in neighboring South Sudan, creating potential continent-wide impacts.
Then there is the question of America’s foreign adversaries. Sudan’s strategic location has made it desirable to adversarial powers, like Russia and Iran, which have each leveraged the conflict to push for naval bases on the Red Sea.China, too, is interested. The PRC has invested nearly $6 billion in Sudan since 2005, and Beijing is currently perpetuating the conflict by providing arms to both warring parties. Countering these malign influences is vital to the continent’s long-term security.
Here, Washington is well-positioned to make a difference. Because of its relationships with prominent outside actors, namely the UAE and Egypt, the United States can play a unique role in containing—and hopefully ending—the conflict. Pressure from Washington on Cairo and Abu Dhabi would have the effect of limiting the scope and resources of the current fighting, making peace more attainable.
Even so, America’s involvement is far from assured. The Administration’s larger turn away from the continent—encapsulated in travel bans and deep cuts to foreign aid—has left the US at a disadvantage in terms of regional engagement. Moreover, in contrast to the DRC’s wealth of critical minerals, Sudan lacks the same overt appeal, making an active US role less immediately attractive. Nevertheless, the conflict in Sudan provides the United States with a unique opportunity to reassert its role as a key regional player.
But doing so won’t be easy. Key Administration insiders, like the State Department’s senior advisor for Africa, Massad Boulos, will need to make a case for action to President Trump and continue to keep the issue at the top of his crowded agenda. Putting public pressure on US allies will be crucial as well. Moreover, manpower will be needed, and the White House will need to appoint the necessary special envoys to demonstrate its renewed focus and help bring any potential deal home.
Should it step up, though, the Trump administration is bound to benefit from renewed political relevance and greater security in Africa. These are objectives worth pursuing.
About the Author: Alexander Brown is a researcher at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, DC.