OPEN// Egypt, Spain stress rejection of any attempt to displace Palestinians 6 last Madrid
They asserted the need to achieve progress at both the political and security levels including the withdrawal of all foreign forces and mercenaries.
The two sides emphasized the necessity of finding a new, unified executive authority in Libya and holding presidential and parliamentary elections.
Shifting to Africa and security of the Red Sea, Egypt and Spain reiterated commitment to maintaining ongoing cooperation in food and security. They also stressed the importance of cooperation in transboundary water management in accordance with the international law.
The two countries asserted the importance of stability in Africa, particularly the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa.
They agreed on the need of maintaining the safety of international navigation movement in the Red Sea as a vital corridor to global trade with respect to its direct impact on the Suez Canal and vital supply chains.
Additionally, the two sides discussed the situation in Sudan with Spain appreciating the Egyptian efforts to achieve stability in the country.
Both sides asserted the necessity of respecting the unity and safety of Sudan and maintaining the national institutions in the country. They underlined the importance of launching a comprehensive political process without any foreign dictations along with achieving democratic aspirations for the Sudanese people.
The two parties are urging countries and donors to honor their pledges they made at the conferences in Geneva on June, 2023 and in Paris on April, 2024 to support Sudan and neighboring states hosting Sudanese fleeing war back home. (MENA)
Y R E/S R E
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily News Egypt
6 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
Egypt holds special importance for our investments across diverse sectors: Japanese minister
Speaking at the Egypt–Japan Business Council Forum, Yuichiro Koga, Japan's State Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, underscored the pivotal role of the Egyptian economy in shaping Japanese investment priorities across multiple sectors. He opened his address by expressing appreciation for Egypt's active role on various fronts, both domestically and internationally. Koga noted the remarkable progress achieved by the Egyptian economy in recent years, emphasising its special significance for Japanese investors. He outlined key areas where Japanese investments are contributing to Egypt's economic development, particularly in industry and energy, while also generating employment opportunities and enhancing local expertise. The Japanese minister also expressed gratitude for Egypt's commitment to deepening cooperation with Japan and fostering stronger partnerships with Japanese companies across a broad range of fields. Beyond the economic sphere, he highlighted the two countries' close collaboration in culture and antiquities, pointing to the successful hosting of several Egyptian archaeological exhibitions in Japan as an example of the strong people-to-people ties underpinning the bilateral relationship.
Al-Ahram Weekly
11 hours ago
- Al-Ahram Weekly
There is no Egyptian proposal to transfer Hamas weapons to Egypt: informed source - Foreign Affairs
Senior Egyptian informed sources on Tuesday denied Israeli media reports which claimed that Cairo had proposed the transfer of Hamas weapons to Egypt. Speaking to Al-Qahera News on Tuesday, the sources stressed that the Egyptian-Qatari proposal, which Hamas has already accepted, only includes a 60-day ceasefire. They added that negotiations on a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas would begin on the first day of the agreement's implementation. Israel's Kan channel claimed on Tuesday that Egypt has proposed transferring the weapons of Hamas and other Palestinian factions to its custody for an indefinite period, as part of a comprehensive post-war plan for the Gaza Strip. Multiple rounds of indirect negotiations – mediated by Egypt and Qatar throughout the two-year Israeli war in Gaza – have failed to secure a lasting ceasefire amid the insistence by Israel, backed by Washington, on continuing the war. On 19 March, Israel unilaterally ended a truce agreement, mediated by Egypt, Qatar, and the US in January, to resume its war on the strip. Tel Aviv and Washington backed off from ceasefire talks in July, claiming that Hamas was not negotiating in good faith. The new ceasefire plan, accepted by Hamas after fresh talks in Cairo, proposes an initial 60-day truce, a partial release of captives, the freeing of some Palestinian prisoners, and provisions for the entry of humanitarian aid. The new proposal also counters a recent Israeli plan to occupy all of Gaza City and ethnically cleanse nearly one million Palestinians to the south of the strip. Follow us on: Facebook Instagram Whatsapp Short link:
Al-Ahram Weekly
11 hours ago
- Al-Ahram Weekly
Sudan's war of mediation
The peace talks in Sudan are becoming a battleground for power as external actors pursue their own agendas and Sudanese civil society is continuously excluded. In the Al-Fasher region of Sudan, a mother walks 12 miles for medicine only to find an empty clinic. Her son is bleeding from shrapnel wounds as gunfire echoes across the town. This is not just war. It is the collapse of diplomacy itself, where ceasefires exist only on paper and peace processes serve only as political theatre. Sudan's Civil War has become not only a humanitarian catastrophe but also a diplomatic failure. It exposes the limits of the international order. At its core, this is not a conflict between equals but a war between Sudan's national army, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the only institution with constitutional legitimacy, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a militia built on paramilitary violence, foreign backing, and the exploitation of chaos. The human toll of the war is staggering. More than ten million people have been displaced since it began, making Sudan the world's largest displacement crisis. Millions more face hunger, disease, and the collapse of basic services. This war is not only destroying lives but is also erasing the foundations of the Sudanese state. The SAF and RSF control fragmented territories, and international mediation in the war has mirrored this fragmentation, creating confusion instead of coherence. The US and Saudi Arabia are leading the Jeddah Process that hopes to end the conflict, while the African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) are pursuing rival tracks. The UN, once central to such crises, appears increasingly sidelined. This pluralism of mediation, far from reinforcing undertakings, has bred incoherence and duplication. The RSF has used these diplomatic gaps to prolong the war, meaning that ceasefires, announced with international fanfare, collapse again and again. Instead of protecting civilians, they allow the militia to regroup, rearm, and entrench its siege tactics. For ordinary Sudanese, the word 'ceasefire' now means little more than a pause before more bloodshed. Regional actors have played contradictory roles, with some seeking to manage security spillovers and others pursuing their own political and economic agendas. Arms flows, covert diplomacy, and financial support have fuelled the conflict rather than contained it, and global diplomacy has struggled to establish a unified stance. Washington presses for humanitarian access but hesitates to apply real pressure, while Europe focuses more on migration than long-term stability. This timid approach emboldens those who profit from the war while discouraging coordinated action. Perhaps the greatest failure of diplomacy has been the erasure of Sudanese civilians from the negotiating table. The 2019 Revolution against former Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir was led by resistance committees, women's groups, and civil society. These forces embodied Sudan's democratic aspirations, yet today they are invisible in the peace talks between the SAF and the RSF, and Western diplomats continue to negotiate with these while sidelining the very actors who represent the country's hope for a legitimate and inclusive future. The deliberate use of starvation and siege tactics by the militias is a grave violation in the war. Under Article 54 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, starving civilians as a method of warfare is strictly prohibited under international law and constitutes a war crime. By failing to confront this, the mediation process in Sudan is not only ineffective but is also complicit in normalising violations that strike at the very heart of civilian protection. Reports from the Darfur and Kordofan regions of Sudan describe villages where civilians have been deliberately cut off from food and medicine in the war. Grassroots organisations, however, have not disappeared: resistance committees organise relief convoys; women's networks run makeshift clinics; and local charities distribute scarce supplies in besieged areas. These actors are maintaining some fragile social cohesion amid displacement and hunger. To treat them as marginal voices is not only unjust, but it is also unsustainable. Any peace agreement that excludes them will collapse under the weight of its own illegitimacy. Since April 2023, every ceasefire in the war has been violated. The Jeddah Process's early promise devolved into meaningless pauses that were exploited by both sides, especially by the RSF, to expand military operations. Without credible enforcement, ceasefires serve media optics, not civilian safety, and for many civilians in the Al-Fasher, Omdurman, or Nyala regions of Sudan 'truce' has become a word synonymous with betrayal. For years, international institutions have promised impartiality and principled engagement in Sudan, but the reality has been selective outrage, ad hoc coordination, and inconsistent leverage. Many Sudanese now ask whether the international system is capable of mediating in good faith in a conflict in which the contrast with Ukraine or Gaza is stark. The latter conflicts have received sustained international media coverage, while the conflict in Sudan has been neglected, suggesting that some wars are deemed too complex or too remote to merit serious engagement. Regional powers have stepped into the vacuum, too often not as neutral mediators but as stakeholders with vested interests. Their 'competitive mediation' undermines the very idea of collective diplomacy, and multiple tracks have not created a momentum for peace as much as so much diplomatic clutter. Three shifts are essential in order to bring about peace in Sudan. First, the mediation tracks must be unified under a single platform. The UN-AU-IGAD tripartite mechanism remains the best option, but only if it is given real political weight and resources. Second, accountability must be enforced consistently. External actors that provide weapons, money, or political cover must face the consequences. Toothless mediation is worse than none, since it legitimises violence without restraining it. Third, Sudanese civilians must be central to the peace process. Resistance committees, women's groups, and local initiatives must have a seat at the table and not as symbolic voices but as co-leaders. The war in Sudan is more than a national tragedy; it is a test of international diplomacy under fire. If the mediation continues to appease the militias and sideline civilians, the consequences will not remain confined to Sudan. Refugee flows will expand, armed groups will proliferate, and neighbouring states will become destabilised. Yet, Sudan also offers a blueprint for change, if the SAF is recognised as the lawful authority, civilians as the custodians of peace, and international law as the guiding principle in the peace process. The alternative is appeasement disguised as peace. The Sudanese war is not a war between equals. In Sudan today, the state is under siege by a militia. To pretend otherwise is to misread both the crisis and the cure. International diplomacy must stop treating Sudan's Civil War as just another conflict and start recognising it as a test of the global order. Restoring legitimacy in Sudan requires the courage to end fragmentation, confront the militias, and put civilians at the centre of the peace process. Anything less will fail the country, and this failure will echo far beyond Sudan's borders. The writer is a senior researcher and director of the East Africa and Sudan Programme at Fox Research AB in Sweden. * A version of this article appears in print in the 21 August, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly Follow us on: Facebook Instagram Whatsapp Short link:
