Why Somalia can play a critical role in resolving the crisis in Sudan

Since the break out of conflict in Sudan between the army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in mid-April, regional bodies and countries have pushed for mediation between the warring sides to prevent the Horn of African state from collapsing.

While Sudan’s neighbours such as Ethiopia, Egypt and Kenya continue with efforts to broker an end to the conflict, Somalia’s role seems to be largely absent or ignored despite its potential to play a critical role in the ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict thanks to the unique characteristics it boasts over its neighbours.

Previous truce deals brokered by Saudi Arabia and the United States have been systematically violated.

Meanwhile, efforts by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) to resolve the conflict continue to face setbacks.

The IGAD summit in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on Monday to kick-start a peace process to end the conflict in Sudan was boycotted by the Sudanese government on grounds that Kenya, which chaired the talks, was impartial. It also accused Kenya in the past of  harbouring the RSF commander General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, commonly known as Hemedti, a claim Kenyan President William Ruto has rejected.

On Thursday, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi hosted Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in Cairo for a summit to “stop the bloodshed” in Sudan.

But these efforts are likely to backfire in light of Sudan’s dissatisfaction with the Ethiopian PM’s proposal to impose a no-fly zone in Sudan due to what he called “a power vacuum” in the country. Meanwhile, Al-Sisi is also believed to be favouring a military victory for the Sudanese army led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan.

More efforts to end the violence in Sudan are expected as fatalities in Sudan continue to rise with over 3,000 deaths recorded in the past three months.

Time to pay back 

Somalia cannot remain a spectator in the Sudanese peace process. The conflict in Sudan is spiralling and the efforts by multiple parties to resolve it have not materialised. As a neighbour of Sudan, Somalia has a moral responsibility to actively advance peace efforts there.

Let us not forget that during the civil war in Somalia in the 1990s up to the late 2000s, Khartoum was one of the key brokers of peace in the then collapsed state hosting a series of talks between the Somali transitional government and Islamic Courts that were crucial in forming a relatively functioning government that Somalia enjoys today. At the time, other Somalia’s neighbours such as Ethiopia and Eritrea were involved in a proxy war that derailed peace in the country.

Sudan is particularly credited for educating thousands of Somali students since the 1990s, many of whom have returned to serve positive roles in Somalia’s public and private sectors.

As such, Mogadishu owes Khartoum sincere efforts to advance peace and stability.

Somalia’s advantage 

Besides being neighbours, Somalia and Sudan share multiple identities. Both countries are African, predominantly Muslim, and Arab. They belong to regional bodies such as the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Countries that neighbours like Kenya and Ethiopia are not members of.

Identities are known to be key soft power tools that Somalia can utilise in its efforts to support peace processes in Sudan.

Moreover, Somalia’s history with dictatorship, civil war, and armed conflict offers it unique firsthand experience of the catastrophes such phenomena have on the country’s disintegration. Years of civil war has also enriched it with knowledge of local mechanisms to resolve conflicts.

Although identity politics is not at the top of the causes of the ongoing conflict in Sudan, history has shown that conflicts mutate as they can turn from general power struggles to identity-based conflicts, with Somalia being a good example.

Unlike Ethiopia and Egypt, Somalia does not share a border with Sudan and, therefore, has no border conflicts with the country. In addition, Somalia has not so far been accused of supporting any side in the war.

As such, Somalia can use these advantages to help mediate between the warring sides in Sudan and encourage them to prioritise national interests.

Not an easy endeavour 

Despite its potential, playing a leading role in resolving the conflict in Sudan is going to be a challenge for Somalia. As a regional power in the 1960s and 1970s, Somalia enjoyed a higher status in the region allowing it to mediate regional conflicts such as the Mogadishu Agreement that ended hostilities between Uganda and Tanzania in 1972.

Today’s Somalia is still emerging from the rubbles after years of state collapse. Its institutions are weak.

Financially, Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world and remains heavily dependent on international support.

Security wise, it still depends on the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS) although the mission is set to end in December 2024.

Hence, Somalia is not held with high regard in the region, factors that are key in playing a leading mediation role.

But this does not mean that Somalia has nothing to offer in advancing peace efforts in Sudan. After all, South Sudan has led mediation efforts in Sudan despite its regional status being lower than that of Somalia. What helped South Sudan be a preferred mediator for Sudan was its shared history and identity with Sudan, and its ability to act impartially.

As such, Somalia has no excuse not to perform its moral duty and step up efforts to support the end of violence in Sudan.