Lt. Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo’s latest address on a humanitarian truce was not just another ceasefire message. It was a carefully calibrated intervention that blended military calculation, political messaging, and diplomatic outreach – and, crucially, placed the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in a position of initiative rather than reaction.
Military expert and retired Staff Maj. Gen. Dr. Mehdi Al-Amin described the speech as a strategic move on both the military and political levels, reflecting the RSF leadership’s ability to read and respond to local, regional and international dynamics. In his view, the address showed a clear grasp of the core of Sudan’s crisis, rather than treating the war as a narrow battlefield issue.
Dagalo’s message went far beyond announcing a temporary humanitarian truce. It outlined a broader vision that acknowledged the realities on the ground and emphasised key pillars for any credible settlement: a cessation of hostilities, international monitoring, and genuine protection of civilians. The address implicitly argued that any sustainable solution must meet military, political and international benchmarks – not just the interests of one faction aligned with General al-Burhan’s army (SAF).
Dr. Al-Amin also underlined how the speech highlighted discipline within RSF ranks and their stated adherence to international and UN resolutions. That framing is designed to project the RSF as a force that can operate within international norms, giving its leadership greater legitimacy in multilateral forums and reinforcing its regional and global credibility at a moment when narratives about “militias” and “warlords” are being weaponised.
Domestically, Dagalo’s address sent pointed messages to his adversaries. By placing responsibility for the continuation of the war on the party that refused to negotiate and insisted on intransigence – a clear reference to the SAF command – he sought to shift the blame for ongoing bloodshed onto Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and his Islamist entourage. In Al-Amin’s assessment, the speech underscored Dagalo’s superiority over al-Burhan on both the political and military planes, showing who is prepared to talk and who is blocking a deal.
From a media and diplomatic standpoint, the expert argued that the address undercut the talking points of RSF’s opponents and the disinformation pushed by legacy outlets aligned with the old regime. The speech was crafted to leave no obvious security or diplomatic loopholes, positioning the RSF leadership as speaking from a place of humanitarian and political credibility rather than mere force of arms.
The address also applied pressure on the foreign backers of the SAF, particularly Egypt, by signalling Dagalo’s readiness to engage openly with the international community. He took care to distance himself from terrorist organisations, challenge the narratives of hardline local opponents and expose the contradictions inside the Islamist camp. At the same time, he tied any lasting solution to the recognition of humanitarian realities and political facts on the ground, rejecting attempts to separate “security tracks” from the fate of civilians.
