Sudan: Between the Hammer of the Berlin Conference Consequences and the Anvil of Rebel Militia Defections

Report: Badreldin Abdulrahman
The “Berlin Conference” is considered one of the arms of foreign intervention in Sudanese political affairs, aimed at imposing a specific governance agenda. This agenda has faced, and continues to face, widespread rejection from all sectors of the Sudanese people, who remain committed to safeguarding national sovereignty. They support the premise that who governs Sudan and how it is governed is a purely internal matter, to be determined by national entities through a purely “Sudanese-Sudanese” dialogue.
This comes at a time when the “fortress” of the rebel Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia appears to be racing toward collapse, fragmentation, and division. This is evident through the emergence of influential defections involving high-ranking leaders, dealing a fatal blow to the militia.
“The Sudanese Government Rejects the Berlin Conference to Preserve National Sovereignty”
Journalist and political analyst Mr. Ibrahim Shaqlaqi stated that the Sudanese government maintains a clear and firm position rejecting the Berlin Conference, as it was organized without its participation or consultation. This stance is rooted in the principle of preserving national sovereignty and rejecting any tracks managed in isolation from the state’s legitimate institutions.
Shaqlaqi noted that Khartoum believes bypassing the government in any process related to Sudan’s political or humanitarian future weakens the legitimacy of the outcomes and limits their chances of success. Furthermore, it may exacerbate the complexities of the crisis rather than resolve them.
To avoid the consequences of foreign intervention, Ibrahim Shaqlaqi emphasized that the primary entry point for any solution remains respect for the principle of “Sudanese ownership” of any peace process or humanitarian arrangements. This entails involving the Sudanese government as a central party and avoiding the creation of parallel tracks that reproduce the crisis through the selective arrangement of political and civilian actors. Additionally, unifying international efforts within a framework that supports national decision-making is a necessary condition for transforming any international conference from a platform for crisis management into an actual tool for ending it.
In a related context regarding the recent defections hitting the RSF militia, Shaqlaqi explained that any split or defection within the structure of armed groups stems from internal pressures, whether related to a decline in military discipline, differences within decision-making centers, or certain leaders’ reassessment of the course of the war.
Regarding the Sudanese case, such developments may impact the cohesion of the RSF leadership hierarchy and affect its ability to manage field operations efficiently. Alternatively, it might lead the militia to end its rebellion and respond to the Sudanese government’s plan submitted to the United Nations since December 2025.
Shaqlaqi added: “It is important to note that the military impact of any defections remains linked to their size, scope, and the level of leaders involved. Limited defections may have a tactical impact, while widespread defections lead to a greater imbalance in the power dynamics. Conversely, the Sudanese Army continues to capitalize on this in its management of the war.”
“Berlin Conference: A Lever for Foreign Intervention to Return ‘Sumoud’ and the Militia to Power”
Dr. Adel Mahjoub Al-Aqib, a professor of journalism at Sudanese universities, indicated that the Berlin Conference is a “full-fat” European creation. Its purpose is to return the “Sumoud” forces to power once again through the lever of foreign intervention under the pretext of achieving peace, as well as to reinstate the terrorist “Dagalo family” militia to the helm of government—the same entity that subjected the Sudanese people to the worst forms of suffering.
Mahjoub argued that the Sudanese government’s position on the conference is based on the fact that it does not serve the interests of the Sudanese people. He described it as a conference destined for failure even before it commenced, due to the lack of government participation and the fact that it was not even invited by the host country.
Dr. Adel asserted that the conference’s objective is clear and contrary to the interests of the Sudanese people. Its repercussions can be avoided by launching a large-scale diplomatic movement to clarify the Sudanese government’s viewpoint, seeking the support of brotherly and friendly nations, and building strong internal public opinion against the conference, which serves the goals of hostile countries, traitors, and agents among leftist forces and neo-liberals.
Regarding the defection of RSF leaders, Dr. Adel Mahjoub stated that this marks the beginning of the end and the grand collapse of this rebel militia. He attributed these defections to a deep sense of bitterness among tribes and groups loyal to the militia, particularly the “Mahameed” tribe following the desecration of “Misteriya.” It is well known that “Al-Nur Qubba” belongs to the Mahameed tribe. Not far from this is the conduct of some individuals from South Sudan toward the “Misseriya.” Collectively, these circumstances create unrest and rebellion among fighters outside the “Mahariya” clan, which will accelerate the militia’s departure from North and West Kordofan before the next autumn. This entire situation will reflect on the realization of the premise of their expulsion from Darfur in the near future.
The repercussions of the Berlin Conference have confirmed the fact that foreign intervention in Sudanese affairs is rejected in its entirety. Meanwhile, related developments support the trend toward an imminent and unsurprising major collapse of the rebel RSF militia due to recent defections and other factors—most notably the crushing defeat imposed on the militia by the Sudanese Army and its supporters across all battlefields.