Sudanese civil and political forces have warned that ignoring international mediation efforts and clinging to rigid conditions set by the Port Sudan authority could push the country deeper into a catastrophic war.
Yasir Arman, head of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, Revolutionary Current, said the speech delivered by Prime Minister Kamil Idris to the UN Security Council on Monday, December 22, 2025, raises fundamental questions about its true intent. Arman questioned whether the proposals outlined represent non-negotiable conditions or a negotiable position that could form the basis for ending the war.
He stressed that if Idris is genuinely a civilian prime minister, his duty since assuming office should have been to side with peace in the interest of civilians. Arman noted that while SAF seeks to achieve its objectives through war, a civilian prime minister should pursue his goals through peace, requiring political imagination, new thinking and a break from traditional approaches.
Engagement with the quartet is essential
Arman urged a serious and constructive response to developments surrounding the crisis, warning that the war has already killed hundreds of thousands and led to widespread crimes against civilians. He cautioned that continuing the conflict risks tearing Sudan apart, spreading instability to neighbouring countries and potentially turning the war into a decades-long conflict, citing Somalia, the DRC and Yemen as examples.
He emphasised the need to engage seriously with the international quartet’s peace efforts, warning that the world is witnessing an unprecedented rise in armed conflicts, which could lead to waning international attention on Sudan if the current opportunity is not seized.
“Triangle of death”
Arman explained that the difference between preconditions and a negotiating position is critical. Preconditions, he said, are non-negotiable demands that must be met before talks can begin, effectively guaranteeing the continuation of war. A negotiating position, by contrast, allows for give-and-take between parties.
He called on international mediators to invite the warring sides to direct talks if Idris’s proposals represent a negotiating stance, or to indirect talks if they are preconditions. Arman warned that the deteriorating humanitarian situation in what he described as the “triangle of death”, El Obeid, Dilling and Kadugli, requires urgent action.
Failure to act, he said, could amount to condemning nearly three million civilians in Greater Kordofan to death and exposing them to war crimes. Arman added that Sudan has extensive experience in negotiations and can reach solutions if there is political will among the parties to the war, backed by regional and international support.
Wajdi Saleh: speech added nothing
Human rights lawyer and Baath Party figure Wajdi Saleh dismissed Idris’s Security Council speech as offering nothing new. He said the proposals simply echoed the long-standing conditions of the Port Sudan authority, insisting that negotiations would only take place after a comprehensive ceasefire under international monitoring and the withdrawal of Rapid Support Forces from all areas they control, demands Saleh said only further complicate the situation.
Saleh questioned Idris’s call for Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue, asking under what reality such dialogue could take place. He noted that while Idris mentioned a transitional period, he failed to clarify who would govern during that phase or how long it would last. Saleh added that references to elections at the end of the transition were meaningless without defining the nature of transitional authority, pointing out that Abdel Fattah al Burhan continues to present himself as head of a “transitional” sovereign council while avoiding any serious discussion of an actual transition.
Ignoring the Jeddah platform
Saleh also criticised the speech for ignoring the Saudi-US Jeddah platform, instead referring to a vague Saudi-US-Egyptian initiative. He said the recognised framework is the international quartet, yet the speech conspicuously avoided mentioning the UAE, effectively portraying the mechanism as a tripartite initiative.
“This way of presenting issues cannot lead to peace,” Saleh said, urging the Port Sudan authority to engage in talks aimed at an immediate humanitarian truce, a ceasefire and unhindered delivery of aid to civilians suffering from what he described as a “damned war”.
“Laughable statements”
Fathi Fadl, spokesperson for the Sudanese Communist Party, mocked Idris’s remarks as “laughable” and “bizarre”, particularly given that they were delivered before the UN rather than to the Sudanese people. He said it was absurd for a prime minister appointed by the military authority and Islamist factions to make such claims internationally while lacking real power on the ground.
Fadl criticised what he called “playing on all sides”, questioning why Idris welcomed the quartet while naming only the US, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, deliberately excluding the UAE. He argued that this omission exposes the lack of seriousness and confirms that Idris holds no real authority in Sudan.
He added that Idris’s failure to respond to the UAE delegate’s rebuttal at the Security Council, which denied interference in Sudan, meant the session effectively ended with a statement from the UAE rather than Sudan. This, Fadl said, showed the New York visit only “made matters worse”, a pattern he described as typical of the Port Sudan authority.
Despite this, Fadl pointed to recent mass mobilisation marking the seventh anniversary of the December Revolution as evidence that a grassroots movement still exists. “The Sudanese people always surprise everyone, including their enemies,” he said.
“Sumoud”: speech only prolongs the war
The civilian democratic coalition “Sumoud” also condemned the initiative presented by the Port Sudan prime minister to the Security Council, calling it an attempt to evade the peace process and legitimise the continuation of a disastrous war.
In a statement, the coalition said the speech offered nothing new and was clearly biased toward a minority benefiting from the war, while ignoring the deepening humanitarian crisis, particularly in North and South Kordofan. Sumoud warned that launching parallel initiatives serves only to seek “false legitimacy” and undermine the internationally backed quartet roadmap issued on September 12, 2025.
The coalition reaffirmed that the quartet’s roadmap remains the only serious path to ending the conflict, accusing remnants of the former regime and their extremist fronts of actively sabotaging peace efforts. It renewed its call for SAF and the Rapid Support Forces to immediately accept an unconditional humanitarian truce, urging the international community to unify the peace track and prevent warring parties from manipulating the political process.
