500 days of the Sudan war: What is happening — and what happens next?

Here is a look at the current state of affairs in Sudan, and the implication of a prolonged conflict for the world.

First, why is Sudan at war?

The war broke out in April 2023, as a direct result of a vicious power struggle between General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the head of SAF, and General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the head of RSF. The military generals have locked horns over Sudan’s political future and its proposed move towards civilian rule.

The roots of the conflict, however, go back to 2019 when the country’s long-serving authoritarian President Omar al-Bashir was overthrown following a countrywide uprising against him. Subsequently, the military and civilian groups decided to share power and an agreement to the effect was signed. Abdalla Hamdok was appointed the Prime Minister until elections were held.

But the new arrangement was short-lived, as Burhan and Dagalo carried out a military coup in October 2021, toppling Hamdok’s government. Burhan became the de-facto leader of the country and Dagalo became the second-in-command.

The military generals promised to hold elections in July 2023. However, as the date for polls approached, differences between the two military generals grew — the main sticking points were how the 10,000-strong RSF should be integrated into the army, and which authority should oversee that process. Tensions came to a boil in April 2023 when RSF was redeployed around the country in a move that the army saw as a threat, leading to war.

What is the current situation in Sudan?

Since the war began, more than 15,000 have died in Sudan — some rescuers put the number at 40,000 but it has not been officially authenticated. It has become one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.

“According to UN experts, around 25 million people – half of Sudan’s population before the war – are in need of urgent assistance. Nearly nine million people are internally displaced, among them about 4 million children. Another 20 million children are out of school. Over half the population of 49.6 million doesn’t have access to healthcare,” a report published in The Conservation said.

An August 29 analysis from The Economist on satellite data and thermal images found Sudan covered with fires — farms and crops were burning across the country. “People were forced to eat grass and leaves,” it said.

The crisis has been exacerbated by floods, which took place in the last week of August. The disaster caused a dam breach in the eastern city of Port Sudan — at least 30 people were killed, hundreds more were believed to be missing, and 20 villages around the dam were decimated. Flooding also severely affected the famine-stricken Darfur region. It washed out displacement camps and further disrupted an already hamstrung humanitarian response.

What happens next?

If the food scarcity continues, 6 million to 10 million could die from starvation by 2027, The Economist said in its analysis. But it is not just the humanitarian crisis that will exacerbate if the war continues. The war could soon become a major geo-political issue.

It can easily spill over into neighbouring countries of Sudan as it shares porous borders with seven fragile states, including Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Libya.

The war can also trigger mass migration towards Europe, where countries like Germany and France are already witnessing a huge inflow. “Already 60% of people in camps in Calais, on the south side of the English Channel, are Sudanese,” according to The Economist report.

Operations of the Suez Canal, which is currently facing disruption from attacks by Houthi rebels in Yemen, could be further affected.

Therefore, there is an urgent need for countries like the United States and the United Kingdom to step in and ensure that a ceasefire agreement is soon implemented in Sudan.

“No one can easily put Sudan back together again. After more than 500 days of pitiless fighting, the damage will take decades to repair. But it is possible to save millions of lives, and reduce the chance of calamitous geopolitical aftershocks if the world acts now,” The Economist said.