Sudan’s Founding Alliance (Tasees) has expressed its strong disapproval of recent statements from several Arab countries opposing the formation of a civilian government in Sudan, calling these remarks incompatible with the aspirations of the Sudanese people.
The alliance also voiced dissatisfaction with the stance of the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy to Sudan, who showed support for the roadmap proposed by SAF commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, a position the alliance claims fails to grasp the country’s complex political realities.
In a related development, Sudan’s army-controlled Ministry of Foreign Affairs welcomed statements from a number of Arab nations, considering them an expression of support for efforts aimed at stabilizing Sudan.
This endorsement comes at a sensitive moment in the country’s political landscape, as the alliance seeks to consolidate its position amid external pressures opposing the formation of a civilian government.
The Sudanese Founding Alliance, which signed its founding charter in Nairobi in February, seeks to establish a civilian government that reflects the will of the Sudanese people.
However, several countries, including Jordan, Somalia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, have firmly rejected the idea of an alternative government in Sudan, adding to the complexity of the country’s political crisis.
The alliance has reiterated its opposition to any attempts to constrain the will of the Sudanese people or impose solutions that do not reflect the true nature of the ongoing crisis. It has called for a comprehensive, inclusive resolution to the Sudanese crisis that acknowledges all active political forces and ensures justice for all segments of the Sudanese population, free from biased external interventions.
The alliance also urged the international community, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait, to adhere to the principles of international law and respect the rights of all Sudanese citizens to self-determination, without interference that threatens justice, freedom, and stability in Sudan.
The alliance pointed to recent comments by Lamamra, the UN envoy to Sudan, as an indication of increasing bias in the UN’s position, warning that support for a one-sided initiative in the conflict (Sudan’s armed forces) instead of a neutral and inclusive process jeopardizes the UN’s credibility as a neutral mediator. This shift in the UN’s position raises serious concerns about the envoy’s ability to perform his role as an impartial facilitator.
The alliance expressed grave concern over the legitimacy of the army-controlled government in Port Sudan, calling it a faction that has exacerbated violence, committed atrocities, and rejected any meaningful negotiations. The alliance argued that by granting implicit legitimacy to this group through the UN’s unilateral initiative, the international community was abandoning core principles of conflict resolution, such as justice, inclusivity, and respect for on-the-ground realities.
The statement highlighted Lamamra’s growing bias, accusing him of deviating from his role as a neutral mediator by aligning with one side of the conflict. The alliance emphasized that the Sudanese people, especially those historically marginalized and persecuted, cannot trust a process that is clearly skewed in favor of one party.
