Why Sudan's RSF chose this parallel government ahead of peace talks
Tasis is based on a partnership between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a powerful armed group that controls swaths of South Kordofan and Blue Nile states in southern Sudan.
SPLM-N has been fighting a rebellion against the central government and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for 40 years – a conflict rooted in aggressive land grabs by central elites.
The RSF and SAF are former allies, yet a power struggle triggered an all-out civil war in April 2023.
Analysts have told Al Jazeera that Tasis aims to challenge SAF for legitimacy and power after more than two years of conflict.
'The Tasis government is the RSF's latest desperate attempt to rebrand itself as a state authority rather than a militia,' said Anette Hoffmann, an expert on Sudan at the Clingendale Institute think-tank in the Netherlands.
'Yet all their actions have continued to prove the opposite. While announcing their government … RSF forces and their allies were besieging entire state capitals and starving innocent civilians,' she told Al Jazeera.
Tasis announced its government just three days before a new round of Sudan peace talks is set to begin on July 29 in the United States.
The talks will bring together representatives from the Sudan Quartet – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the US. Neither SAF nor the RSF will be included in this round, according to Africa Intelligence.
Regardless, the RSF has long been wary of being dismissed as a mere 'armed group' in ceasefire negotiations and left out of the circles of power and influence in a post-war Sudan due to a lack of international legitimacy.
By forming its own government, the Tasis Alliance aims to garner recognition from some friendly states and boost its bargaining position in future negotiations, said Kholood Khair, an expert on Sudan and the founder of the Confluence Advisory think-tank.
'What's interesting is that there has been so little disclosed about these new talks, yet it has started a fury across Sudan and catalysed the formation of these two governments,' Khair told Al Jazeera.
She added that the army adopted a similar ploy in May when it appointed Kamel Idris as prime minister in Port Sudan, a strategic city on the Red Sea Coast.
Idris recently appointed five new ministers to round out his new government, just a day after Tasis announced its parallel administration.
Like Port Sudan, the RSF-backed government is run by a council of military elites and civilian loyalists.
The RSF's leader, Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo, heads the Tasis's 15-member Presidential Council. SPLM-N leader Abdelaziz al-Hilu serves as his deputy.
A reported 47 percent of posts in the new administration went to RSF-aligned armed commanders and civil servants, while SPLM-N was given about one-third of the posts.
The rest were handed out to smaller armed groups and political parties who advantageously joined Tasis to boost their relevance, as previously reported by Al Jazeera.
Post appointees include Suleiman Sandal from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) – a rebel group that emerged out of the Darfur wars and splintered in the current war – who was made interior minister.
Al-Tahir Hajar, from the Sudan Liberation Forces Gathering (SLFG), which also emerged from the Darfur wars, is a prominent member of the Tasis leadership council.
The prime minister of the Tasis government is Mohamed Hassan al-Ta'aishi, a politician from Darfur and a former member of the transitional Sovereign Council that led Sudan shortly after former President Omar al-Bashir was toppled in 2019.
The Sovereign Council was headed by SAF chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Hemedti. The two were supposed to step down from power in 2021, yet they orchestrated a coup to dismiss the then-civilian cabinet and dash hopes for democracy.
Since SAF recaptured the capital Khartoum from the RSF in March, the former has been in control of the east and centre of the country, while the RSF has attempted to consolidate its control over the western and southern regions.
The Tasis government may have ended up cementing that division more than helping it gain an advantage at the negotiating table, said Alan Boswell, an expert on Sudan with International Crisis Group.
'The RSF aims to be legitimate as a national actor,' he said. 'Yet [this government] makes de facto partition all the more likely, even if that is not the strategic intent.'
Khair added that the creation of a second government further incentivises armed groups to accumulate power in hopes of scoring a post in one of the two administrations.
'This [new government] really catalyses the proliferation of different armed groups,' she said. 'More armed groups will mobilise … to win a position [in one of the two governments] during wartime.'
'This is a reality that really entrenches war dynamics.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Why is Trump moving nuclear submarines after spat with Medvedev?
Donald Trump has ordered the repositioning of two United States nuclear submarines to 'appropriate regions' relative to Russia, as the US president grows frustrated over stalling peace talks aimed at bringing an end to Russia's war in Ukraine. On Friday, Trump exchanged heated words with Dmitry Medvedev, Moscow's military leader and former president. The day before, Trump had issued an ultimatum to Russia: If it does not agree to a ceasefire by next Friday, August 8, he will impose a package of economic sanctions. The next day, Medvedev posted on social media, describing Trump's threat as 'a step towards war'. He wrote that Trump was 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia'. In a post on Truth Social, Trump responded: 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.' What has Trump done? On Friday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he had ordered two US 'Nuclear Submarines' to be repositioned to 'appropriate regions'. Trump cited what he regarded as threatening comments made by former Russian President Medvedev, now deputy chair of Russia's Security Council. He called Medvedev's statements 'highly provocative', adding that his actions were a precaution. 'I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that,' Trump wrote. In the run-up to his presidential campaign, Trump promised to end Russia's war in Ukraine within 24 hours; however, several discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin have since not yielded any results. What do we know about the submarines Trump says he will reposition? Not much – and we do not know which submarines Trump is referring to. Trump did not say if he had ordered the repositioning of submarines with nuclear engines or submarines carrying nuclear missiles. Trump did not reveal the location of the submarines, either, as mandated by US military protocol. However, Trump's statement is so far being viewed as a rhetorical threat, rather than a military one, as security analysts noted that the US already has nuclear-powered submarines that are deployed and capable of striking Russia as a deterrent. What prompted Trump's submarine move? Mostly, his frustration over the lack of progress of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. But, in this case, the social media spat with Medvedev seems to have tipped him over into action. Trump and the Russian military leader have been engaged in mud-slinging on social media platforms for some time. Earlier, responding to Trump's new deadline for a ceasefire in Ukraine, Medvedev wrote in a post on X that Trump was playing an 'ultimatum game' with Russia. 'Each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war. Not between Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country. Don't go down the Sleepy Joe road!' Medvedev had said. Earlier in the week, while announcing trade tariffs for India – along with an extra penalty for buying Russian oil – Trump stated that he did not care if India and Russia 'take their dead economies down together'. In a Telegram post on Thursday, Medvedev wrote that Trump should 'revisit his favourite movies about the living dead and recall just how dangerous the mythical 'Dead Hand' can be'. Russia's 'Dead Hand system' is a Cold War-era automatic nuclear retaliation mechanism designed to launch a counterstrike even if the Russian leadership is wiped out in a first strike. Trump replied: 'Tell Medvedev, the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he's still President, to watch his words. He's entering very dangerous territory!' Speaking to reporters after his post about the nuclear submarines, Trump said on Friday: 'We just have to be careful. And a threat was made and we didn't think it was appropriate, so I have to be very careful. 'A threat was made by a former president of Russia, and we're going to protect our people.' Who has more nuclear power: Russia or the US? Combined, the US and Russia account for nearly 87 percent of the world's total nuclear arsenal. The geopolitical rivals control about 83 percent of the nuclear warheads actually deployed or ready for operational use. Despite significant post-Cold War reductions, global nuclear arsenals remain at a 'very high level', according to a report by the Federation of American Scientists. As of January 2025, just nine countries are estimated to possess a total of approximately 12,241 nuclear warheads. Today, according to the nonprofit Arms Control Association, the US deploys 1,419 and Russia deploys 1,549 strategic warheads on several hundred bombers and missiles. The US conducted its first nuclear test explosion in July 1945; the following month, it dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Four years later, the Soviet Union conducted its first nuclear test explosion. As of 2025, the US Navy operates 71 submarines, all nuclear‑powered, making it the largest undersea force. This fleet includes 14 Ohio‑class ballistic missile subs (SSBNs), four Ohio‑class converted guided‑missile submarines (SSGNs) loaded with Tomahawk missiles for strikes or special operations, and about 53 fast‑attack submarines designed for intelligence gathering, anti‑submarine warfare and cruise‑missile support. By comparison, the Russian Navy fields fewer than 30 nuclear‑powered submarines, including approximately 10 strategic SSBNs, a mix of modern Borei and older Delta IV classes, that carry Bulava missiles. It also operates several strategic‑missile cruise boats and about six Akula‑class attack submarines equipped for anti‑ship and multi‑role missions. Russia is investing in modern fleet expansion through the Yasen‑M class. Has Russia responded to Trump's submarine manoeuvre? No. Neither the Kremlin nor Medvedev has publicly responded to Trump's order to move two nuclear submarines following their war of words. Viktor Vodolatsky, a senior Russian lawmaker and deputy chairman of the State Duma's committee on Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) affairs, however, stated that Russia possesses 'significantly more nuclear submarines in the world's oceans' than the US, claiming US subs have 'long been under their control' and, therefore, no specific response is required. Last month, the US President said he was 'disappointed' with Putin. 'We'll have a great conversation. I'll say: 'That's good, I'll think we're close to getting it done,' and then he'll knock down a building in Kyiv,' he told the BBC in an interview. On Friday, in an apparent reference to Trump's comment, Putin said: 'As for any disappointments on the part of anyone, all disappointments arise from inflated expectations. This is a well-known general rule.' On a ceasefire with Kyiv, Putin said he wants a 'lasting and stable peace' in Ukraine; however, he has not given any indication that Russia is willing to achieve it any quicker. In 2017, during his first term as US president, Trump announced that he had sent two nuclear submarines to the Korean peninsula. Soon afterwards, he held a meeting with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un. Whether this latest move will lead to a new meeting with Putin is yet to be seen, however.
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Is Sudan on the path to irreversible fragmentation?
Parallel government recently formed by the RSF has been widely rejected. Sudan has been struggling with a devastating conflict for more than two years. Now it faces yet another challenge. The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces has announced a parallel government to rival the one led by the army chief. The African Union has rejected the move, and the army has dismissed it as a desperate attempt by the RSF to cling to power. But analysts say the move carries a real risk, one that could further divide an already fractured country. So how will this new power struggle play out both inside Sudan and more widely? And how could it affect the Darfur region, where the RSF still wields control? Presenter: Adrian Finighan Guests: Hafiz Mohamed – Director of Justice Africa Sudan, an advocacy organisation and research institute Kholood Khair – Sudanese political analyst and founder of Confluence Advisory, a think tank formerly based in Khartoum Cameron Hudson – Senior associate in the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
Al Jazeera
6 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Why Sudan's RSF chose this parallel government ahead of peace talks
The Tasis Alliance, a coalition of Sudanese armed groups formed in February, has unveiled a parallel 'transitional peace' government to rival Sudan's wartime government in Port Sudan. Tasis is based on a partnership between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a powerful armed group that controls swaths of South Kordofan and Blue Nile states in southern Sudan. SPLM-N has been fighting a rebellion against the central government and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for 40 years – a conflict rooted in aggressive land grabs by central elites. The RSF and SAF are former allies, yet a power struggle triggered an all-out civil war in April 2023. Analysts have told Al Jazeera that Tasis aims to challenge SAF for legitimacy and power after more than two years of conflict. 'The Tasis government is the RSF's latest desperate attempt to rebrand itself as a state authority rather than a militia,' said Anette Hoffmann, an expert on Sudan at the Clingendale Institute think-tank in the Netherlands. 'Yet all their actions have continued to prove the opposite. While announcing their government … RSF forces and their allies were besieging entire state capitals and starving innocent civilians,' she told Al Jazeera. Tasis announced its government just three days before a new round of Sudan peace talks is set to begin on July 29 in the United States. The talks will bring together representatives from the Sudan Quartet – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the US. Neither SAF nor the RSF will be included in this round, according to Africa Intelligence. Regardless, the RSF has long been wary of being dismissed as a mere 'armed group' in ceasefire negotiations and left out of the circles of power and influence in a post-war Sudan due to a lack of international legitimacy. By forming its own government, the Tasis Alliance aims to garner recognition from some friendly states and boost its bargaining position in future negotiations, said Kholood Khair, an expert on Sudan and the founder of the Confluence Advisory think-tank. 'What's interesting is that there has been so little disclosed about these new talks, yet it has started a fury across Sudan and catalysed the formation of these two governments,' Khair told Al Jazeera. She added that the army adopted a similar ploy in May when it appointed Kamel Idris as prime minister in Port Sudan, a strategic city on the Red Sea Coast. Idris recently appointed five new ministers to round out his new government, just a day after Tasis announced its parallel administration. Like Port Sudan, the RSF-backed government is run by a council of military elites and civilian loyalists. The RSF's leader, Mohamed Hamdan 'Hemedti' Dagalo, heads the Tasis's 15-member Presidential Council. SPLM-N leader Abdelaziz al-Hilu serves as his deputy. A reported 47 percent of posts in the new administration went to RSF-aligned armed commanders and civil servants, while SPLM-N was given about one-third of the posts. The rest were handed out to smaller armed groups and political parties who advantageously joined Tasis to boost their relevance, as previously reported by Al Jazeera. Post appointees include Suleiman Sandal from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) – a rebel group that emerged out of the Darfur wars and splintered in the current war – who was made interior minister. Al-Tahir Hajar, from the Sudan Liberation Forces Gathering (SLFG), which also emerged from the Darfur wars, is a prominent member of the Tasis leadership council. The prime minister of the Tasis government is Mohamed Hassan al-Ta'aishi, a politician from Darfur and a former member of the transitional Sovereign Council that led Sudan shortly after former President Omar al-Bashir was toppled in 2019. The Sovereign Council was headed by SAF chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Hemedti. The two were supposed to step down from power in 2021, yet they orchestrated a coup to dismiss the then-civilian cabinet and dash hopes for democracy. Since SAF recaptured the capital Khartoum from the RSF in March, the former has been in control of the east and centre of the country, while the RSF has attempted to consolidate its control over the western and southern regions. The Tasis government may have ended up cementing that division more than helping it gain an advantage at the negotiating table, said Alan Boswell, an expert on Sudan with International Crisis Group. 'The RSF aims to be legitimate as a national actor,' he said. 'Yet [this government] makes de facto partition all the more likely, even if that is not the strategic intent.' Khair added that the creation of a second government further incentivises armed groups to accumulate power in hopes of scoring a post in one of the two administrations. 'This [new government] really catalyses the proliferation of different armed groups,' she said. 'More armed groups will mobilise … to win a position [in one of the two governments] during wartime.' 'This is a reality that really entrenches war dynamics.'
