The Invisible Enemy in the Sudan War

Asharq Al-Awsat

2 days ago

Sudan's new Prime Minister, Dr. Kamel Idris, faces formidable challenges as he navigates the most complex and critical moment in the country's history. Sudan has been ravaged by a devastating war, its economy has been enfeebled, its infrastructure is crumbling, its institutions are decaying, and its resilient population is suffering. In his inaugural address after being sworn in, Prime Minister Idris acknowledged the weight of the responsibility on his shoulders and promised to realize the vision that he laid out in the two books and presented publicly on camera.
While the government has a long agenda. Its gravest challenges may not be its visible tasks, though they are many. An 'invisible enemy' that has been hollowing out the state from within for years: is corruption.
Although corruption has long weighed on this wounded nation, it has acquired new and more dangerous dimensions during the war. Indeed, in times of conflict, state institutions are weakened, effective oversight disappears, and individuals exploit dire security and economic conditions to abuse their power and loot both public and private resources. Since the war began, numerous accounts of rampant corruption have surfaced everywhere: from humanitarian aid and government appointments to public funds and even the moral fabric of society.
These are not merely rumors. Officials have publicly addressed the issue. Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan has criticized fraud in the civil service and nepotism, while Vice President of the Sovereignty Council Malik Agar acknowledged that corruption had been deeply entrenched.
The reality is that corruption in Sudan is no longer a problem of isolated incidents or the product of individual misconduct; it has become a 'way of life.' Not only does it harm the economy, it also presents an existential threat to the state. That is why Sudan today needs to wage a serious and relentless battle against corruption, going beyond statement and rhetoric to deliver results through structural reforms of state institutions.
Fighting corruption under these conditions is not just a demand of the masses or institutional idealism; it is a national imperative- a requisite for reform, reconstruction, attracting investment, and rebuilding trust between the government and its citizens. Clear political determination is not enough. Sudan needs a fully-fledged campaign armed with effective tools and actionable plans.
Where Do We Begin?
The government of Dr. Kamel Idris can take different approaches to open horizons in the fight against corruption. To succeed, it will need the full backing of all other state actors. Among the steps the state can take are:
Establishing an independent national anti-corruption commission with real authority.
Creating a specialized court for corruption-related crimes that combines efficiency with speed, ensures that cases are not trapped into bureaucratic limbo.
Passing a strict financial disclosure and asset declaration law that applies to senior officials and all public sector employees.
Expanding the digitization of public services to reduce direct contact and curb bribery, building a single online portal for customs, taxation, procurement, licensing, and more.
Launching a nationwide media campaign under the banner of 'Fighting Corruption.' It must raise compelling and relatable slogans that speak directly to the public and are repeated enough times to become catchphrases that resonate even in the halls of government.
In parallel with efforts to raise awareness, protecting journalists is essential for allowing them to expose corruption through investigative reporting. A whistleblower protection system must also be established.
Reform will remain incomplete before a purge in sensitive posts in the judiciary, police, customs, taxation, ports, and border control. Civil society must also be empowered so that it can contribute to public oversight and help ensure transparency and accountability.
There are many successful examples of countries that have tackled corruption through their determination and bold reforms, and they demonstrate that change is possible when there is political will. Take Rwanda, for instance: following the genocide of the 1990s, it was a failed state crippled by violence and corruption. However, it chose the path of reform and reconstruction, adopting a zero-tolerance policy on corruption. It strengthened the Office of the Auditor General, created a dedicated anti-corruption body and specialized courts, and prosecuted high-profile offenders.
Another example is Singapore, which had been a poor country with limited resources and rampant corruption until the 1960s. It embarked on a path toward reform and revival, enforcing robust oversight mechanisms and ensuring judicial independence, as well as passing strict anti-corruption laws. It also offered competitive salaries to civil servants and law enforcement officials (in the judiciary, police, customs, and tax agencies) to reduce the temptation of bribes, while simultaneously imposing strict systems of oversight, accountability, and prosecution.
If Dr. Kamel Idris's government appeases the corrupt, it will only add to the frustration. However, if it governs like it is the country's "last chance" and receives the support of other officials, this government's tenure could become a turning point for Sudan. However, the battle will not be easy. It requires political courage, a moral revolution, and a conviction that corruption is not inevitable and that this a battle that must be won if Sudan is to recover and rise.