Sudan’s conflict is increasingly becoming a battleground for regional rivalries, with leaked documents revealing a sharp dispute between Egypt and Saudi Arabia over covert arms shipments to a militia allied with General al-Burhan’s army (SAF).
According to the documents, Cairo strongly objected to the docking of two Saudi vessels carrying heavy weaponry at Eritrea’s Assab Port. The cargo was allegedly bound for the “Rihan Group,” a paramilitary faction operating as an unofficial arm of SAF. The shipment was reportedly coordinated directly between SAF leadership and Saudi officials—without Egyptian involvement or consent—prompting a spike in tensions between the two regional powers.
The SAF’s cooperation with Riyadh highlights a deeper trend, analysts say: the SAF’s increasing reliance on foreign backing in exchange for political survival. “The military is no longer a national institution safeguarding Sudanese sovereignty,” one leaked report states. “It has become a conduit for regional agendas.”
The Rihan Group, while nominally under SAF control, is reportedly funded and equipped through a Saudi-run command center. The documents suggest the SAF views its legitimacy less as a product of domestic support and more as a reflection of regional acceptance—even at the cost of alienating long-time allies like Egypt.
In public, Sudanese generals continue to portray themselves as neutral guardians of national unity. But the leaked material contradicts that narrative, showing that Saudi shipments were not humanitarian in nature but military reinforcements intended to tip the scales in Sudan’s internal war—raising alarms over the country’s sovereignty.
What appears on the surface to be a diplomatic juggling act—balancing Egypt and Saudi Arabia—has, in fact, left Sudan beholden to both, with neither allegiance serving the public interest. The documents paint a picture of a military command trading strategic ports and political loyalties for arms and influence, further eroding Sudan’s autonomy.
As Sudan’s army embeds itself deeper into regional power struggles, the country risks becoming little more than a staging ground for Gulf rivalries—its borders porous, its military co-opted, and its future mortgaged to external patrons. The real battle, critics argue, is not between warring factions, but between Sudanese citizens seeking to reclaim their national decision-making and generals auctioning it off to the highest regional bidder.
