Sudanese civilian and political forces opposed to the war have categorically rejected Army Commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s call for the so-called “Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue,” viewing it as a political maneuver aimed not at ending the war, but rather at consolidating the army’s power, granting it political legitimacy, and paving the way for the return of elements of the former regime and the Islamic Movement to power.
This statement came at the conclusion of a consultative meeting hosted by the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, on August 22 and 23, with the participation of the “Sudanese Declaration of Principles” coalition, the Popular Congress Party, the Umma Party, civil society organizations, women’s and youth networks, as well as public figures including intellectuals, academics, writers, and cultural figures.
The meeting concluded with a joint position paper titled “The Peace Process We Want,” which presented the vision of anti-war democratic civil forces to end the fighting and establish an independent political process, free from the dominance of the warring parties and attempts to reinstate military rule.
Dialogue Under Army Protection
The document affirmed that Al-Burhan’s call does not represent a genuine peace process, as it is being managed from within areas under the control of one of the warring parties and under its protection, amid ongoing fighting and a worsening humanitarian disaster, and without first reaching a ceasefire.
The coalition of forces argued that launching a political process in areas under army control, and under the supervision of the authority led by al-Burhan, would effectively entrench the de facto division of Sudan and turn the dialogue into a tool for legitimizing military rule, rather than serving as a pathway to ending the war and restoring the democratic civilian process.
It argued that the essence of the initiative was to empower elements of the former regime and the Islamic movement, along with their political fronts, and to give forces allied with the army an opportunity to regroup and return to power through a political process whose participants and outcomes were predetermined.
An Alternative Peace Process
In response to al-Burhan’s initiative, the document proposed an alternative vision for a comprehensive peace process based on three simultaneous and interrelated tracks: the humanitarian track, the ceasefire track, and the political track.
It emphasized the need to manage this process through equal-footing negotiations, under an independent and mutually agreed-upon framework, ensuring that neither side of the war dominates it and allowing for the addressing of the root causes of Sudan’s recurring wars and crises, rather than settling for partial compromises that merely reproduce the causes of the conflict.
According to the document, the political process should encompass three balanced tracks, including civilian and political forces not aligned with either side of the war, forces aligned with the army, and forces aligned with the Rapid Support Forces.
Conversely, it called for limiting the participation of the army and the Rapid Support Forces to the humanitarian and security tracks related to ceasing hostilities and implementing the necessary arrangements, without involving them in the political track or allowing them to determine the future of governance in Sudan.
The document emphasized that the political process must be civilian in nature, and that issues of governance and democratic transition must remain within the purview of political and civil forces, free from the dominance of arms and attempts to impose a military fait accompli.
It also called for the complete exclusion of the dissolved National Congress Party, the Islamic Movement, and their affiliates from the peace process, given the responsibility of the former regime and its forces for undermining the civilian transition and plunging the country back into a cycle of war and violence.
The Quartet’s Roadmap
The coalition of forces considered the Quartet’s roadmap, issued on September 12, 2025, to be the best framework for building a serious peace process that would end the war and pave the way for a democratic civilian transition.
They affirmed their full readiness to engage constructively with the Quintet mechanism and to share the observations and perspectives reached by the anti-war forces, based on the principle of full Sudanese ownership of the political decision and the peace process. The document called for unifying the efforts of the Quartet, the Quintet, and the Troika within a single, coordinated framework, thereby preventing a proliferation of platforms and conflicting initiatives, and strengthening collective regional and international pressure on both sides of the war to cease hostilities and address the humanitarian crisis.
Coordination Among Anti-War Forces
The participants agreed to form a joint committee tasked with developing common understandings among the anti-war forces and coordinating their positions and visions regarding the peace process, thereby strengthening the presence of the democratic civilian camp and unifying its efforts in confronting efforts to prolong the war and reinstate military rule.
The meeting concluded with an appeal to Sudanese men and women at home and in countries of asylum and exile to remain steadfast in their rejection of the war, to counter rhetoric of hatred, betrayal, and polarization, and to work toward a comprehensive peace that restores power to civilians and preserves the unity of Sudan.
The participants also praised the civil and labor union movements calling for an immediate and comprehensive end to the war, emphasizing the importance of the role played by civil, professional, youth, and women’s groups in resisting the war and defending the democratic transition to civilian rule.
The meeting expressed its gratitude to the State of Ethiopia for providing the opportunity to hold the gathering and for its role in supporting efforts to bring about peace in Sudan.
