An Open Letter to Secretary Rubio: If You Know Who Is Fuelling Sudan’s War

Dear Secretary Rubio,

You have described Sudan’s war as a tragedy in which several countries are directly supporting the opposing sides — a proxy conflict in which external actors are helping to sustain a war that Sudanese people have already paid an unbearable price for.

You have also said that some countries are allowing their territory to be used to move weapons into Sudan.

And you have made clear that the United States is deeply engaged in trying to bring this war to an end.

So Sudan Futures would like to ask a simple question:

If you know who is helping to fuel this war, why is the international pressure not focused more directly on those external actors?

Why are they not being engaged with at the highest level?

Why are those facilitating weapons, financing recruitment and military support not facing consequences proportionate to the role they are playing?

The United States has imposed sanctions on individuals and networks involved in procurement and recruitment for the war. That is important. But the evidence emerging from international investigations points to something larger: transnational networks and states operating beyond Sudan’s borders are helping to sustain the capacity of the belligerents to continue fighting. (U.S. Department of the Treasury⁠ )

If the war is being sustained from outside Sudan, then pressure on Sudanese actors alone cannot be enough.

There is another question that deserves an answer.

Why should the Sudanese state and its people bear the consequences of measures that can further weaken the country’s institutions, economy and ability to function, while the external networks that help sustain the war remain able to operate?

Sudan is not simply a battlefield.

It is a sovereign country whose people are trying to survive a war that has destroyed homes, livelihoods, infrastructure and communities. The Sudanese economy is collapsing, the currency is under extraordinary pressure, and millions have been displaced. (Reuters⁠ )

The answer cannot be to weaken Sudan further without simultaneously cutting the external supply lines that allow the war to continue.

If Washington believes that there is no military solution to this conflict, then the international community must address the machinery that makes continued military escalation possible.

That means following the money.

Following the weapons.

Following the logistics.

Following the recruitment networks.

And engaging directly with the states and entities that enable them.

The United States has considerable diplomatic and economic leverage. Secretary Rubio, you have said that those supporting the warring parties must use their influence to bring them towards a peace agreement. If that is the case, why should the same principle not apply to those who are helping to sustain the war?

Sudan Futures therefore asks the United States to match its recognition of the international dimensions of this war with a corresponding diplomatic strategy:

Engage those who enable the war.
Pressure those who sustain it.
Sanction those who profit from it.
And protect Sudanese people from measures that further weaken the country they are fighting to keep alive.

Sudan does not need another cycle in which the international community focuses on the symptoms while the sources of the war remain intact.

If you know who is fuelling this war, Secretary Rubio, the question is not whether they should be part of the solution.

It is why they are not already under sufficient pressure to become part of it.

Sudan Futures