A senior Emirati diplomat has publicly acknowledged that his country and others made a critical error in their Sudan policy by failing to sanction the generals who overthrew the civilian government in 2021. The admission comes as the United Arab Emirates faces mounting international criticism over its relationship with the Rapid Support Forces paramilitary group, which stands accused of carrying out mass killings in the Sudanese city of El Fasher.
The diplomatic envoy stated that the international community should have taken a firmer stance against the military takeover that displaced Sudan’s transitional government. This represents a significant shift in position for the UAE, which had previously worked to strengthen military influence in Sudan following the 2019 uprising that ended Omar al-Bashir’s three-decade rule.
Analysts note that Gulf financial support played a crucial role in shaping Sudan’s political trajectory. When civilian leaders gained authority in late 2019, further disbursements from a $3 billion loan package were halted. Experts suggest this financial pressure critically weakened the civilian government and contributed directly to the 2021 coup, which eventually escalated into open warfare between the army and RSF in 2023.
Evidence compiled by United Nations investigators and independent experts indicates the UAE has been covertly arming the RSF, though Emirati officials deny these allegations. The United States government imposed sanctions earlier this year on the militia leader and several UAE-based companies accused of funding his operations.
For more than eighteen months, Sudanese civilian organizations had warned that the RSF would commit large-scale ethnic violence if it captured El Fasher. These predictions placed particular responsibility on the UAE, considered the foreign power with the greatest capacity to restrain the paramilitary forces.
The Emirates has responded to international condemnation by claiming it is the target of a disinformation campaign orchestrated by opponents within the Sudanese military and non-governmental organizations hostile to Gulf states. Emirati officials maintain they support a return to civilian leadership and argue that both warring factions have disqualified themselves from determining Sudan’s political future.
Regional analysts suggest the UAE’s continued engagement with Sudan reflects strategic interests including access to natural resources and containing political Islam. Sudan represents a significant source of gold, with official exports to the UAE generating over $1.5 billion last year, though estimates indicate much larger quantities are smuggled out of the country through neighboring states.
International efforts to resolve the conflict have focused on bringing key external players together. A recent agreement between the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE outlined a path toward a three-month humanitarian truce leading to a permanent ceasefire and eventual transition to civilian governance. The statement specifically rejected influence by extremist groups, reflecting Emirati security concerns.
Despite these diplomatic initiatives, negotiations have yet to produce concrete results, suggesting that higher-level engagement may be necessary to convince the warring parties and their international supporters that continued conflict offers only further devastation for the Sudanese people.
