Sudan's crisis and the sound of international silence

Arab News

23-04-2025

https://arab.news/b7z5e
Two official statements that were issued last week reflect the international community's position on the crisis in Sudan. One was from the G7 foreign ministers and the second followed the London conference on Sudan, which included participants from Western, Arab and African countries, alongside major international and regional organizations. While both statements called for a ceasefire, the protection of civilians and unhindered humanitarian access, they differed significantly in tone and approach.
The G7 statement used strong, direct language and placed clear blame, particularly on the Rapid Support Forces. This offered a clear message that the Sudanese army has been able to gain some sort of legitimacy within Western countries. In contrast, the London conference joint co-chairs' statement was more diplomatic and vague, avoiding direct accusations or outlining real enforcement mechanisms. In my view, both models fall short: one talks tough but offers no tools for change, while the other hides behind process and delays.
Both approaches also reflect a broader failure: that of managing the crisis instead of resolving it, while ignoring the deep suffering of the Sudanese people. These are not the first documents issued since the war erupted in April 2023. Rather, the international community is merely continuing its familiar pattern of hesitant and superficial engagement. Former US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield last year described the situation in Sudan as a 'man-made' catastrophe and expressed 'shame' over the continued suffering of civilians without decisive international action.
This failure also reveals confusion among world powers about the nature of the Sudanese crisis, which has moved beyond being just a humanitarian emergency. It has become a sharp reflection of the absence of international will when it comes to crises in African or developing countries. Sudan has been abandoned before. The tragedy of Darfur is one example. History is now repeating itself under a new name and amid a new silence.
The international community is merely continuing its familiar pattern of hesitant and superficial engagement
Areig Elhag
It is painful that, when Sudanese people flee their country in search of safety, they are met with closed doors and indifference, while there is little international pressure on those responsible for the war. Even when accepted as refugees, they remain unsafe, exposed to violence and theft, as seen in refugee camps in Ethiopia. While the world pours resources and attention into other conflicts, Sudan is pushed into the shadows.
There are many reasons for this silence. Many believe the international focus shifted toward more 'visible' wars, such as those in Ukraine and Gaza (the Gaza war started after Sudan's war), making Sudan less of a priority. These wars have drawn extensive media and political attention. In comparison, Sudan's pleas, mainly voiced through UN agencies, have received little serious response. In today's world, it seems that attention and aid depend not on the level of suffering, but on how loud the crisis is politically.
This is especially disturbing when all the signs of a catastrophe are already there: famine, mass displacement, sexual violence and ethnic cleansing. Yet the world still looks away, as if Sudan does not qualify as a crisis that is worth acting on. As a Sudanese myself, that forces me to ask some reasonable questions: Is there discrimination in how humanitarian crises are treated? Is global solidarity conditional on race, geography or political convenience? We must name this for what it is: aid discrimination, selective empathy or, simply, racism.
Last September, at the UN General Assembly, I interviewed Djibouti's Foreign Minister Mahmoud Ali Youssouf. Reflecting on the discussions at the summit, he and other African leaders expressed concern that African issues are not treated as a priority. 'Even though all countries are equal, the agenda is often shaped by the interests of Western powers,' he said.
This sentiment reflects a broader frustration: many Africans feel that the West lacks a clear and respectful vision for its relationship with the continent. For Africans, especially Sudanese, true justice and democracy require treating every life with equal value regardless of geography.
It seems that attention and aid depend not on the level of suffering, but on how loud the crisis is politically
Areig Elhag
Take Sudan as an example. According to the latest UN data, this African country is currently facing one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world. About 25 million people, half the population, urgently need assistance. Some 25.6 million face acute food insecurity, including 8.5 million in emergency conditions. Nearly 13 million people have been displaced, including 8.6 million internally displaced and 3.8 million refugees or returnees. Sudan has become the biggest source of forced displacement in the Horn of Africa. It is also the largest child displacement crisis globally, with more than 90 percent of the country's estimated 19 million school-aged children deprived of formal education.
In North Darfur, the situation is even more alarming. There are signs of a looming famine, widespread reports of ethnic and sectarian violence and horrific crimes like rape and murder, all happening without serious international action. Even local emergency response groups, which try to serve communities, are now being targeted instead of protected.
In my reporting on Sudan for Alhurra TV, I have spoken with many officials from nongovernmental organizations and UN agencies. They all agree that the humanitarian situation is deteriorating rapidly and that the world's response is far too slow and shallow. Yet G7 countries continue to issue statements about their inability to find a political solution, while offering no meaningful action or initiative.
And here lies the great contradiction: the same countries that have slashed humanitarian funding for Sudan are the ones calling for peace and solutions. And without providing pressure, accountability or support. What we are witnessing is not just a political or a humanitarian crisis, it is a moral test for the world. If silence continues to be the international response, then we must rethink what solidarity, justice and even humanity really mean.