Title: Armed movements in Darfur refuse to take a stand in the current conflict
Introduction: In the Darfur region, plagued by incessant violence, the armed movements have adopted a position of neutrality in the face of the ongoing conflict. Despite pressure from military and paramilitary forces, these movements refuse to take sides and consider the current war to be “absurd”. This article will examine the reasons for their neutrality and the initiatives put in place to protect the population and the humanitarian convoys.
A position of neutrality in the face of an “absurd” war: Since the start of the conflict in April, the armed movements in Darfur that signed the Juba peace agreement in 2020 have unanimously chosen not to take a position in this war. They believe that the fight is between former partners and that the regular army has failed to protect the people of Darfur from the atrocities committed by the Rapid Support Forces. In addition, they criticize the delay in the creation of the civil protection force provided for in the peace agreement.
A joint force to protect Darfur: Faced with this situation, Minni Minnaoui, leader of the Sudan Liberation Movement and governor of Darfur, initiated the creation of a joint force in partnership with the Justice and Equality Movement and the Liberation Movement of Sudan – the Transitional Council. The purpose of this force is to protect Darfur as well as humanitarian and medical aid convoys. It brings together members of different armed movements who have put aside their differences for a common cause.
Exceptions to neutrality: Although the majority of armed movements in Darfur maintain their neutrality, some have defected. The Sudan Liberation Movement-North, Mostapha Tambour faction, chose to join the fighting alongside the regular army against the Rapid Support Forces. Similarly, the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Sudan-North, led by Abdelaziz el-Helou, is waging an armed struggle against the regular army in South Kordofan.
Conclusion: In a context of violence and war, the armed movements of Darfur have made the choice of neutrality, refusing to take part in a conflict which they consider “absurd”. Despite this, initiatives have been put in place to protect the population and humanitarian convoys. This neutrality, although contested by some dissident movements, aims to preserve peace and establish lasting solutions for Darfur