Middle East
Is Sudan’s war merging with South Sudanese conflicts? | Sudan war
New alliances in Sudan’s civil war risk sparking a regional conflict by drawing in neighbouring South Sudan, analysts tell Al Jazeera.
The biggest development was an alliance in February between the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), who established a government to rival Sudan’s current de facto leadership.
The RSF has been at war with Sudan’s army since April 2023 and seeks to increase its control and influence in central and eastern Sudan to expand its operational theatre.
SPLM-N is an armed movement headed by Abdel Aziz al-Hilu, which has been fighting Sudan’s army for decades and controls swaths of the states of South Kordofan and Blue Nile, both on the border with South Sudan.
Analysts said Sudan’s army is responding by backing South Sudanese militias to fight the SPLM-N and the RSF along their shared 2,000km (1,240-mile) border.
South Sudan is already dealing with its own political crisis, which could tip the country back into an all-out civil war.
“If things fall apart in South Sudan, then that would make it very difficult to separate the war in Sudan from the war in South Sudan,” Alan Boswell, an expert on South Sudan and Sudan for the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera.
Strategic alliance
SPLM-N has been criticised for allying with the RSF, which is accused of committing numerous atrocities by the United Nations and other observers.
Al-Hilu likely chose the alliance because he couldn’t afford to stay neutral any longer, said Kholood Khair, an expert on Sudan and the founding director of the Confluence Advisory think tank.
“Abdel Aziz realised the RSF will soon be his neighbour [next to South Kordofan state] and he can’t fight both the army and the RSF at the same time,” she told Al Jazeera.
On March 23, the RSF captured West Kordofan state, which borders South Kordofan
South Kordofan also shares borders with North Kordofan and White Nile states. The latter serves as a major strategic point to reach central Sudan, including the country’s breadbasket state known as Gezira, which the RSF recently lost to the army.
Blue Nile state is also a strategic point because it shares an international border with Ethiopia.
Partnering with SPLM-N gives the RSF a much larger operational theatre to smuggle in supplies from South Sudan and Ethiopia and plot new attacks against the army – and civilians – in central and northern Sudan, Boswell said.
“The army wanted to push RSF west of the Nile [towards the western region of Darfur] by basically capturing all the bridges [in Khartoum],” he told Al Jazeera.
“But if RSF can go back and forth through [South Sudan] from South Kordofan and if it can go through Blue Nile and into Ethiopia, that poses a major threat and makes the army’s containment strategy that much more difficult,” he said.
War by proxy
During Sudan’s second north-south civil war from 1983 to 2005, before South Sudan became independent, Khartoum sought to undermine the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), the main group fighting for the south’s liberation. To do so, it supported southern militias against it.
The war ended with a peace agreement that gave southerners the right to vote in an independence referendum, and in 2011, South Sudan became the newest country in the world.
SPLM-N, which grew out of the SPLM, shares the South Sudanese ruling elite’s history of fighting the Sudanese army.
During the civil war, the Nuba tribespeople of South Kordofan and Blue Nile fought as part of the SPLM while the government “normally relied on proxies to fight its wars”, said Hafez Mohamed, who is originally from the Nuba Mountains and heads the human rights group Justice Africa.
In 1987, the government began arming nomads and pastoralists referred to as “Arabs” to fight against sedentary farmers in the south who are seen as “non-Arabs”.
For years to come, this divide-and-conquer approach would be the army’s modus operandi to combat rebellions across the country, most famously birthing in the early 2000s what would later become the RSF.
When President Omar al-Bashir came to power through a bloodless military coup in 1989, he doubled down on this strategy by forming the Popular Defence Forces (PDF) – an instrument for the then-National Islamic Front ruling party to politically and militarily mobilise young men.
The “Arab” PDF forces became notorious for setting entire villages on fire and carrying out summary killings.
The terrifying abuses often exacerbated local competition for farmland, which stems from decades of aggressive state-backed land policies that enriched national elites and uprooted local communities for industrial farming.
Guilty by affiliation
After South Sudan seceded, the Nuba felt left behind in Sudan.
According to the peace agreement that ended the civil war, the Nuba in Blue Nile and South Kordofan would engage in vaguely worded “popular consultations” with the central government to address the root causes of conflict.
However, the consultations never materialised due to a lack of political will from Khartoum and the Nuba fighters.
The former was looking to consolidate control over what remained of Sudan through force. The latter, rebranded as the SPLM-N, continued their rebellion with limited political and logistical help from South Sudanese President Salva Kiir, according to a report by Small Arms Survey from March 2013.
These historical ties, Boswell said, make Sudan’s army chief, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, believe Kiir is quietly backing the RSF and SPLM-N alliance.
“Kiir has always been close with SPLM-N,” he told Al Jazeera. “And from the [army’s] perspective, it holds [South Sudan] accountable for anything SPLM-N does.”
Kiir may even be surprised that his old comrades have inked a partnership with the RSF. In 2015, the army had dispatched the RSF to the Nuba Mountains to battle al-Hilu’s fighters.
However, the RSF suffered a humiliating defeat largely because it was more accustomed to fighting in the sprawling desert of Darfur than the green uplands of the Nuba Mountains.
The origins of the RSF date back to the first Darfur war in 2003, in which “Arab” tribal militias were recruited by the army to crush a mainly “non-Arab” rebellion against state neglect and lack of representation in the central government.
The “Arab” militias committed countless atrocities, such as summary killings and systematic rape, earning them the name the “Janjaweed”, meaning “Devils on Horseback” in Sudanese Arabic.
In 2013, al-Bashir repackaged the Janjaweed into the RSF to help his regime and fight counterinsurgencies across the country, not just Darfur.
Little did he know that the RSF would rebel against the army years later.
Divide and rule again?
The army now appears to be activating other old proxies in South Sudan to counter the new partnership.
South Sudan is loosely split politically between militia and regular forces loyal to Kiir and an array of militias nominally aligned with Vice President Riek Machar.
Kiir belongs to the Dinka, South Sudan’s largest ethnic group, while Machar is a Nuer, the second largest tribe.
Their rivalry dates back to the pre-independence civil war, which saw Machar accept help from Khartoum’s government to fight against the SPLM in an attempt to overthrow its then-leader John Garang.
In July 2005, seven months after the war came to an end, Garang died in a helicopter crash. Kiir, who was his deputy, quickly assumed control of the SPLM.
In 2013, two years after South Sudan gained independence, a power struggle between Machar and Kiir descended into a civil war.
Most Nuer forces loosely aligned with Machar coalesced into the SPLM-In Opposition (SPLM-IO) to differentiate themselves from Kiir’s SPLM.
The violence killed about 400,000 people before a shaky power-sharing agreement was signed five years later.
While violence in South Sudan’s capital, Juba, calmed down after the peace deal, atrocities continued in the peripheries due to the government’s practices of appointing corrupt governors, coopting local militias and extracting resources, according to Joshua Craze, an independent expert on South Sudan and Sudan.
He added that Sudan’s current war has been spilling into the conflict-ridden peripheries of South Sudan, referencing clashes between some SPLM-IO commanders and the RSF this month. The RSF and SPLM-N are present along the shared border with South Kordofan running next to South Sudan’s Unity and Upper Nile states.
Some of the clashes with the RSF reportedly took place with an SPLM-IO armed group in Upper Nile. More fighting reportedly took place in Sudan’s Blue Nile state.
“[Sudan’s army] pretty much wants to disrupt RSF’s movements along the [South Sudan-Sudan border] …by supporting some SPLM-IO commanders,” Craze told Al Jazeera.
Al Jazeera sent written questions to Sudanese army spokesperson Nabil Abdullah asking if the army was providing logistical and material support to SPLM-IO factions. He had not responded by the time of publication.
Integrated conflict?
On Thursday, Kiir sent his security forces to place Machar under house arrest, a move that now pushes South Sudan closer to the brink of an all-out civil war, according to the UN.
Kiir accuses Machar of supporting the Nuer community militias that fought with government forces this month.
But Craze said Machar has no command over these militias and added that they are responding to the government’s predatory and oppressive behaviour in their regions.
“What we are facing is very disturbing and dangerous. We are facing the total fragmentation of South Sudan,” Craze told Al Jazeera.
If this forecast is true, then many young South Sudanese men may end up fighting as mercenaries in Sudan, Boswell said, noting that army-backed groups and the RSF are already recruiting South Sudanese and “recruitment could pick up.”
He warned that if South Sudan slips back into civil war, the RSF would likely benefit.
“I don’t think a collapse in Juba plays into the interest of [Sudan’s army],” he said. “Even if the army thinks Juba helps the RSF, the collapse of South Sudan would give the RSF a much greater operational theatre than it already has.”
Middle East
Saudi Arabia calls Israel barring Arab ministers West Bank trip ‘extremism’ | Israel-Palestine conflict News
Foreign ministers from Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE had planned the visit to discuss Palestinian statehood and end to war on Gaza.
Saudi Arabia has accused Israel of “extremism and rejection of peace” after it blocked a planned visit by Arab foreign ministers to the occupied West Bank.
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud made the remarks during a joint news conference in Jordan’s capital, Amman, on Sunday with his counterparts from Jordan, Egypt, and Bahrain.
“Israel’s refusal of the committee’s visit to the West Bank embodies and confirms its extremism and refusal of any serious attempts for [a] peaceful pathway … It strengthens our will to double our diplomatic efforts within the international community to face this arrogance,” Prince Faisal said.
His comments followed Israel’s decision to block the Arab delegation from reaching Ramallah, where they were set to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The ministers from Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had planned the visit as part of efforts to support Palestinian diplomacy amid Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza.
Israel controls the airspace and borders of the West Bank, and on Friday announced it would not grant permission for the visit.
“The Palestinian Authority – which to this day refuses to condemn the October 7 massacre – intended to host in Ramallah a provocative meeting of foreign ministers from Arab countries to discuss the promotion of the establishment of a Palestinian state,” an Israeli official had said, adding that Israel will “not cooperate” with the visit.
Prince Faisal’s trip to the West Bank would have marked the first such visit by a top Saudi official in recent memory.
Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said blocking the trip was another example of how Israel was “killing any chance of a just and comprehensive” Arab-Israeli settlement.
An international conference, co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, is due to be held in New York from June 17 to 20 to discuss the issue of Palestinian statehood.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty said the conference would cover security arrangements after a ceasefire in Gaza and reconstruction plans to ensure Palestinians would remain on their land and foil any Israeli plans to evict them.
Israel has come under increasing pressure from the United Nations and European countries, which favour a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, under which an independent Palestinian state would exist alongside Israel.
Palestinian group Hamas claims a recent ceasefire proposal passed to them by United States special envoy Steve Witkoff is different from one they had agreed to a week earlier.
Basem Naim, a leading Hamas official, told Al Jazeera on Saturday that the group “responded positively” to the latest proposal relayed by Witkoff, even though it offered “no guarantees to end the war”, according to Naim.
Israel has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians since October 2023, and its total aid blockade since March has caused starvation and a famine-like situation in Gaza, home to 2.3 million people, most of whom were displaced by 19 months of relentless bombardment.
Amid international pressure, Israel has allowed a trickle of aid into Gaza, which has been described as a “drop in an ocean” by humanitarian groups.
Here’s what you need to know about the ceasefire proposal.
Did Hamas reject the ceasefire proposal?
According to the group, no.
It says it responded positively but added a few key provisions.
What are the key points in Hamas’s proposal?
There are a few.
Hamas has responded to the latest US-proposed ceasefire with demands for a pathway to a permanent ceasefire, instead of a temporary one where the Israeli government could unilaterally restart hostilities as they did in March.
They have also called for a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and the resumption of aid and assistance to the besieged area.
What are the key differences in this proposal and the one Witkoff relayed to Hamas?
Witkoff proposed a 60-day pause in hostilities. After that, the parties (Israel and Hamas) would work to agree to extend the pause.
The issue with this is that the last time it happened, Israel unilaterally decided to cut aid to Gaza and started bombing it. To avoid a similar scenario, Hamas has tried to negotiate on the timeline for releasing the captives, 10 of them alive and 18 bodies of those killed during the war. Witkoff’s proposal called for the release to take place within a week of the 60-day pause.
However, Hamas fears Israel will resume its bombing campaign upon the release of the captives, so it has called for staggering their release throughout the pause.
It has called for a set list of negotiation topics to avoid what has happened in past negotiations with Israel, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu added provisions in what critics say was an attempt to derail talks and prolong the war.
According to the website Drop Site News, Hamas also reinserted a provision from the May 25 agreement that Israel had withdrawn.
That provision would be for Hamas to hand over the governing of Gaza to “an independent technocratic committee”.
What is the US reaction to Hamas’s additions?
Witkoff called Hamas’s response “totally unacceptable” and said it “only takes us backward”.
“Hamas should accept the framework proposal we put forward as the basis for proximity talks, which we can begin immediately this coming week,” he wrote on X, formerly Twitter.
“That is the only way we can close a 60-day ceasefire deal in the coming days in which half of the living hostages and half of those who are deceased will come home to their families and in which we can have at the proximity talks substantive negotiations in good-faith to try to reach a permanent ceasefire.”
I received the Hamas response to the United States’ proposal. It is totally unacceptable and only takes us backward.
Hamas should accept the framework proposal we put forward as the basis for proximity talks, which we can begin immediately this coming week.
That is the only…
— Office of the Special Envoy to the Middle East (@SE_MiddleEast) May 31, 2025
US President Donald Trump previously said the two sides were nearing a deal.
What is Israel saying?
The US and Israel seem to be in agreement on the terms.
Israel claims its officials agreed with the US proposal for a 60-day ceasefire.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Israel “backed and supported” the new proposal.
Netanyahu criticised the Hamas response, parroting Witkoff and laying the blame on the Palestinian group for failing to accept the proposal.
“As Witkoff said, Hamas’s response is unacceptable and sets the situation back. Israel will continue its action for the return of our hostages and the defeat of Hamas,” Netanyahu said.
If the US and Israel agree, why is Hamas holding out?
Hamas is wary of past instances where Israel chose to unilaterally break the ceasefire. That happened in March, when Netanyahu decided to block all aid from entering Gaza and restart the war.
Tamer Qarmout, an associate professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, described the negotiations between Hamas and Israel as taking place with “no good faith whatsoever”.
“They [Israel] are fixated on one key goal, which is Hamas’s capitulation and surrender, and disappearing from the scene,” Qarmout told Al Jazeera.
“Hamas is engaged in these negotiations just to try to reduce the horrors of the war, to allow some humanitarian aid to enter and to also look for a dignified exit. No one in Hamas wants to see themselves surrendering this way.”
What happens now?
In the interim, Israel is continuing to attack Gaza.
On Sunday, Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinians who had gathered at aid distribution sites run by a US-backed group, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in southern and central Gaza. At least 31 people were killed in Rafah and another near the Netzarim Corridor.
Meanwhile, residential homes across Gaza are still being bombed relentlessly.
Middle East
Israel kills 32 Palestinians waiting for food at US-backed Gaza aid sites | Israel-Palestine conflict News
Israel has killed at least 32 Palestinians waiting to get food at two aid distribution sites in Gaza, leaving more than 200 others injured.
Israeli tanks opened fire on thousands of civilians gathered at a distribution site in southern Gaza’s Rafah on Sunday morning, killing at least 31 people, according to Gaza’s Government Media Office.
Soon after, another person was killed in a shooting at a similar distribution point south of the Netzarim Corridor in Gaza City, said the office’s statement on Telegram.
The aid is being distributed by Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a controversial group backed by Israel and the United States, which has completed a chaotic first week of operations in the enclave.
The United Nations and other aid groups have refused to cooperate with the GHF, accusing it of lacking neutrality and suggesting the group has been formed to enable Israel to achieve its stated military objective of taking over all of Gaza.
‘Killed for seeking one meal for children’
Ibrahim Abu Saoud, who witnessed the attack on aid seekers in Rafah, told The Associated Press news agency that Israeli forces opened fire on people as they moved towards the distribution point.
Abu Saoud, 40, said the crowd was about 300 metres (328 yards) away from the military. He said he saw many people with gunshot wounds, including a young man who died at the scene.
“We weren’t able to help him,” he said.
Al Jazeera’s Hind Khoudary, reporting from Deir el-Balah in central Gaza, said Palestinians are being killed while trying to secure “one meal for their children”.
“This is why Palestinians have been going to these distribution points, despite the fact that they know that they are controversial. They [distribution points] are backed by the US and Israel, but they do not have any other option,” she said.
“[Even] the food parcels that were distributed to Palestinians are barely enough. We are talking about one kilo of flour, a couple of bags of pasta, a couple of cans of fava beans – and it’s not nutritious. It’s not enough for a family in Gaza nowadays.”
The GHF told the AP that Israeli soldiers fired “warning shots” as Palestinians gathered to receive food. The group denied reports that dozens of people were killed, describing them as “false reporting about deaths, mass injuries and chaos”.
The Israeli army said in a statement on the Telegram messaging app that it was “currently unaware of injuries caused by [Israeli] fire within the humanitarian aid distribution site” and that the incident was still under review.
The Government Media Office in Gaza condemned the attacks, describing the GHF’s distribution points as “mass death traps, not humanitarian relief points”.
“We confirm to the entire world that what is happening is a systematic and malicious use of aid as a tool of war, employed to blackmail starving civilians and forcibly gather them in exposed killing points, managed and monitored by the occupation army and funded and politically covered by … the US administration,” it said in a statement.
Speaking from Gaza City, Bassam Zaqout of the Palestinian Medical Relief Society said the current aid distribution mechanism had replaced 400 former distribution points with just four.
“I think there are different hidden agendas in this aid distribution mechanism,” he told Al Jazeera. “The mechanism does not cater to the needs of the people, such as the elderly and people with disabilities.”
Palestinian group Hamas, which runs the enclave’s government, released a statement, saying the Israeli shootings were a “blatant confirmation of premeditated intent” as it held Israel and the US fully responsible for the killings.
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) said the killings were a “full-fledged war crime” and demanded international intervention to “stop this ongoing massacre and impose strict accountability mechanisms”.
Sunday’s killings capped a deadly first week for the project’s operations, coming on the back of two earlier shootings at two distribution points in the south – the first in Rafah, the second west of the city – which saw a combined total of nine Palestinians killed.
In Gaza, crucial aid is only trickling in after Israel partially lifted a more than two-month total blockade, which brought more than two million of its starving residents to the brink of a famine.
India general admits jet losses in clash with Pakistan: Here’s what he said | India-Pakistan Tensions News
Saudi Arabia calls Israel barring Arab ministers West Bank trip ‘extremism’ | Israel-Palestine conflict News
Why Hamas is seeking to change the US-proposed Gaza ceasefire deal | Gaza
-
Africa4 days agoSurvivor of Liverpool car ramming talks of shock and panic
-
Sports4 days agoThe Knicks are bringing hope and title dreams back to New York after years in the doldrums
-
Lifestyle3 days agoChildren and careers: Talking to kids about what they want to be when they grow up
-
Lifestyle4 days agoHow to decorate a patio, balcony or other small outdoor space
-
Lifestyle4 days agoFaizan Zaki hopes to go from spelling bee runner-up to champ
-
Middle East5 days agoHajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia to begin on June 4 | Religion News
-
Lifestyle4 days agoA guide to navigating tariffs if you’re planning a wedding
-
Middle East5 days agoSudan says cholera outbreak killed 172 people in a week | Health News