As the brutal civil war in Sudan enters its fourth year, the United States has launched a renewed diplomatic push to stem the tide of violence that has displaced millions and pushed the nation to the brink of collapse. At the heart of this latest international initiative is a comprehensive proposal calling for an immediate 90-day humanitarian truce, a measure intended to provide the necessary breathing room to negotiate a permanent ceasefire and establish a civilian-led transition to democratic elections.
According to internal documents recently brought to light, the U.S. proposal represents a critical attempt to stabilize a country devastated by power struggles between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The conflict, which ignited in April 2023 following disagreements over the integration of their respective military structures, has evolved into a humanitarian catastrophe marked by accusations of genocide, widespread hunger, and the rampant spread of disease.
The U.S. framework aims to move beyond temporary ceasefires, which have historically failed to hold. It includes provisions for a United Nations-led mechanism designed to oversee and support the withdrawal of forces from key strategic locations. Specifically, the proposal prioritizes the regions of North Darfur—where the RSF recently seized the city of al-Fashir—and North Kordofan, a region currently grappling with intense drone-led military campaigns.
However, the path to peace remains fraught with deep-seated mistrust. While the Sudanese military government has expressed a willingness to engage with most of the U.S. plan, it has placed a significant condition on its full acceptance: the complete and unconditional withdrawal of the RSF from all cities they have occupied since May 11, 2023. This demand serves as a major sticking point, echoing the fundamental disagreements that have derailed previous peace efforts in the region.
The diplomatic situation is further complicated by conflicting signals from the Sudanese leadership. While there was initial confusion—with reports circulating that the Sudanese government had rejected the U.S. initiative—there has been a recent, if cautious, shift in tone. Massad Boulos, a senior U.S. adviser for Arab and African affairs, publicly expressed optimism last week, noting that General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, head of the Sudanese army, has seemingly moved toward accepting the proposal rather than dismissing it outright.
For its part, the RSF has acknowledged receiving the latest draft. A senior official within the paramilitary organization told reporters that they have provided a written response, though the specifics of their position remain undisclosed. Despite these diplomatic overtures, the reality on the ground remains grim. The RSF continues to assert control over vast swathes of territory, particularly in Darfur, where UN experts have raised alarms over the formation of parallel government structures and continued human rights abuses.
A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, while declining to comment on the specific leaked documents, emphasized the urgency of the situation. “We look forward to the parties accepting this truce and peace plan as presented without preconditions,” the spokesperson stated, highlighting the growing international frustration with the ongoing stalemate.
Beyond the immediate cessation of hostilities, the U.S. proposal envisions a long-term restructuring of Sudan’s security sector. This includes the creation of a unified national army—a process involving rigorous disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of combatants. Furthermore, the plan calls for a political process led by Sudanese civilians, explicitly excluding elements associated with the former regime’s ideology or militias accused of committing atrocities.
