It has become clear that the war in Sudan is entering a new phase to shape a new path toward peace. Saudi Arabia, with its weight, position, and balanced relations, has managed to reclaim the role it began in May 2023 and present a more realistic formula to end the war that has exhausted the state, society, and the region.
The American return announced by President Trump came after his administration realized that leaving the arena to various regional powers would not lead to stability, and that the Jeddah Platform remains the most accepted and neutral framework. Thus, it appears that Riyadh and Washington are now moving in a partnership based on “restoring balance” and offering solutions.
However, the success of this effort is conditioned upon four main pillars:
First: A clear return to the Jeddah 2023 track as the sole negotiation reference that has gained international and regional recognition.
Second: Reforming the American mediation structure by transferring the file to the U.S. Department of State, given its previous experience with the Sudanese file. The problem was not the absence of American presence, but its nature—particularly in the person of advisor Massad Polis, whose presence was considered an obstacle due to perceptions of declining neutrality among Sudanese parties.
Therefore, his removal has become essential, along with appointing a new U.S. envoy with clear executive powers, independent from regional influence, and supported by a specialized technical and political team to ensure neutrality and effectiveness. This change restores the U.S. role as guarantor of the negotiation process and gives Sudanese parties genuine confidence in Washington’s commitment to implementing what is agreed upon.
Third: Linking peace to tangible economic incentives, compensation for victims, reconstruction of infrastructure, and support for affected areas.
Fourth: Recognizing the narrative of the war as seen by the Sudanese state and recently affirmed by the United Nations through the words of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk: a proxy war and an armed rebellion driven by external ambitions to control the country’s natural resources.
These foundations do not merely shape a negotiation approach but also safeguard Sudan’s state equilibrium and sovereignty, preventing the dilution of the conflict’s reality or equating the army with the rebellion.
The most significant development in the scene is the widening Sudanese welcome for the Saudi-American initiative—a remarkable political shift that gives the new path a momentum unmatched by any initiative since the war began.
The Rapid Support Forces officially announced their welcoming of the initiative, describing it as positive—a clear signal of their readiness to engage in a serious negotiation process after months of military escalation and violations that burdened civilians.
The scene grew more optimistic as supportive positions emerged from most Sudanese political forces, including historical parties and influential civil entities, considering the Saudi-American effort the only practical path capable of halting the country’s bloodshed.
The most striking surprise, however, came from the Sudanese Islamic Movement, long viewed by many as uninterested in ending the war and inclined toward military victory. Yet its latest statement, signed by its Secretary-General Ali Karti, offered an entirely different reading. The movement expressed deep appreciation for the Saudi initiative and described the efforts of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a “commendable endeavor” that restores the voice of truth and protects Sudan from external agendas seeking to plunder its resources and divide its land.
It also affirmed its commitment to a just peace that preserves the dignity of the Sudanese people and rejects any intervention aimed at weakening the state. This shift in the Islamic Movement’s stance—one of the most influential actors in Sudan’s political and social environment—reflects a profound change in its approach to the war, moving from a logic of “military victory” to “conditional stability,” granting the Saudi-American initiative a political and social acceptance not previously available.
In light of this movement and internal acceptance, Riyadh and Washington are expected to move toward practical steps that include: an urgent three-month humanitarian ceasefire for security and humanitarian arrangements under international monitoring, followed by another ceasefire for the political track to enable Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue under a regional umbrella that may require the inclusion of parties such as Turkey, Qatar, Egypt, and the African Union.
Despite all this optimism, the path remains fraught with local and regional complexities—from the fragmentation of rebel forces to the multiplicity of decision-making centers within them, to conflicting interests of neighboring states, and the deep mistrust among political parties. Nevertheless, the current initiative represents the most realistic opportunity since the war began, bringing together international backing, strong Saudi will, and Sudanese readiness to accept a negotiation path that is fair to the Sudanese people and national sovereignty, and conducive to sustainable peace.
According to Face of Truth, Sudan today stands at a historic crossroads: either a peace that rebuilds the state or a continuation of a war that drains its economic resources and its people. Therefore, the Saudi-American initiative—bolstered by broad support and by rebuilding U.S. mediation on neutral and effective foundations—may be the last bridge before the abyss, and a new horizon that restores this nation’s dignity, stability, and standing after years of war and continuous bloodshed.
Wishing you well and safety.
Saturday, 22 November 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com
