Title: Armed movements in Darfur refuse to take sides in the war
Introduction :
In the conflict in Darfur, the armed movements have adopted a position of neutrality, refusing to take sides with one or the other faction. This decision was motivated by their belief that this war is senseless and does not serve the interests of the people of Darfur. However, military and paramilitary actors sought to win them over to their side. In this article, we will explore the position of the armed movements in Darfur and the reasons that led them to remain neutral in this conflict.
The rejection of war by the armed movements:
Since the beginning of the war in Darfur on April 15, the armed movements that signed the Juba peace agreement in 2020 have refused to engage in the conflict. They believe that the current struggle is between the 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 reproach the army for having delayed setting up the civil protection force provided for in the peace agreement.
The creation of a common force for the protection of Darfur:
Faced with this situation, Minni Minnaoui, leader of the Sudan Liberation Movement and current governor of Darfur, took the initiative to create a joint force in partnership with the Justice and Equality Movement and the Sudan Liberation Movement – the Council of transition. The mission of this force is to protect Darfur as well as humanitarian and medical aid convoys. However, an armed movement in Darfur, the Sudan Liberation Movement-North, refuses for the moment this principle of neutrality and took part in the fighting alongside the regular army.
The other armed movements involved in the conflict:
Outside Darfur, another armed movement, the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Sudan-North, based in South Kordofan, is also engaged against the army. This movement has not signed the peace agreement and continues its struggle independently. It is headed by Abdelaziz el-Helou.
Conclusion :
The armed movements of Darfur have opted for neutrality in the ongoing conflict, believing that war does not serve the interests of the people of Darfur. Despite the attempt of certain military actors to rally them to their camp, they remain faithful to their position. Only the Sudan-North Liberation Movement refuses this neutrality and engages alongside the regular army