Dr. Cameron Hudson, former US President Barack Obama's special envoy to Sudan, a former official for Africa affairs at the US National Security Council, said that there is great skepticism about the commitment of the parties to the conflict in Sudan to the temporary truce, stressing the need to evaluate the scene every hour to see how serious they are.

Speaking to the program "Beyond the News" (2023/4/18), he explained that there is a great fear that the two sides will stop the confrontation only for a period that allows diplomatic teams to leave the country so as not to be in the crosshairs, wondering what can happen next in the absence of observers and leaving civilians in the cycle of violence alone.

This comes against the backdrop of the entry into force of a humanitarian truce in Sudan on Tuesday evening, after the army and the Rapid Support announced its approval for 24 hours, at a time when the correspondent of Al-Jazeera monitored the flight of warplanes in the skies of Khartoum and the response of ground anti-aircraft to it, shortly after the beginning of the truce.

The truce was reached after the US Secretary of State called Army Commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Rapid Support Forces Commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo (Hemedti) and demanded a humanitarian truce.

Speaking beyond the news, Hudson pointed out that Washington's message is based on holding the two parties responsible for the events taking place, regardless of who started them, pointing out that there are reports indicating that the support forces are "operating in an undisciplined manner," and may target diplomatic teams, including the shooting towards a US vehicle belonging to the embassy yesterday.

He also stressed the need not to give credibility and legitimacy to the two parties so that they can be held accountable for what they have done, and to send them a clear message that neither of them can play a future role in Sudan, as they are - according to his assessment - not interested in the lives of civilians or the infrastructure in the country.

He expressed his fear that the departure of diplomats to Khartoum will weaken any message sent from international capitals for restraint, as civilians will be left alone in a city living a war between two warring factions, stressing the need to send a clear message to the parties about their responsibility for the consequences of their actions, as accountability may not come tomorrow, but trial is inevitable, he said.

He also accused the parties to the conflict of not being serious about handing over power to civilians, even if they stated otherwise, and said that the goal of each is to buy time for their personal interests, "as each chose the course of the war to impose what it sees as a fait accompli."

Conflicting statements

Al-Rasheed al-Mu'tasim, a researcher at the Khartoum Centre for Dialogue and Strategic Studies, said there is no longer a link between the RSF-affiliated bases deployed in civilian neighbourhoods and their leaders, considering them groups looking for supplies and personal survival.

Speaking beyond the news, he pointed out that the army agreed to the truce from a humanitarian standpoint due to the spread of bodies in some areas, and the exposure of vital areas - including health facilities - to attacks by the Rapid Support Forces.

He said that the excesses of the Rapid Support Forces are known to citizens before the army, and they photograph and publish them on social media, pointing out that there are large mobilization operations by the support forces from the western side, and from the Darfur side, as they move towards the capital.

Al-Mu'tasim believes that the Rapid Support Forces seek to create a situation in the media and through communication with the outside that allows them to stabilize, but the army considers in its knowledge what is happening a battle for the existence of the central state, as the support forces are not a political entity, but rather a rebel military faction, and the army will not accept this under any perception.

On the other hand, Sudanese political analyst and researcher in international relations Hafez Kabir believes that talk of a separation between the members of the Rapid Support Forces and its leadership is belied by objective facts in reality, and that its leadership has a strong connection with the international community, which was evident in recent interactions.

He said that the rapid support seeks as much as possible to abide by the truce, and in fact, the violation of the truce began with the flight of army aircraft, which indicates - in his estimation - a premeditated intention not to comply, or a separation of forces from what the leadership wants.

Holding the support forces responsible for civilian casualties because their forces are present in civilian neighborhoods is misplaced, because this presence was established by the army by setting up military facilities inside cities and between residential neighborhoods, so it is not logical to blame the support forces afterwards.

He believes that there is a phobia among groups supporting the military component of foreign mediation and hostility to any international role, saying that this is inherited from the former regime and its agenda and elements that still exist, according to his assessment, adding, "The army wants to monopolize the security and military institution and fully control the process of reforming them."