Cairo:
Sudan has accused the United Arab Emirates of complicity in genocide in a filing at the International Court of Justice, putting the spotlight on the oil-rich monarchy’s alleged involvement in a devastating civil war.
The UAE has long been accused by Sudan and others of supporting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which have been fighting the regular army for nearly two years — an allegation the Gulf state denies.
How is the UAE involved in Sudan, and what ties does it have to the RSF?
Why is Sudan important to the UAE?
One of Africa’s largest countries, Sudan has a wealth of natural resources including vast agricultural lands, gas and gold, of which it is the continent’s third-largest producer.
It neighbours Libya, where Abu Dhabi backs the rebel authorities, and has a coastline on the Red Sea — a crucial maritime route for oil shipping.
In 2021, Sudan’s army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan seized power in a coup alongside his deputy, RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, known as Hemeti.
Two years later fighting erupted between the two generals, with powers including the UAE, Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Russia accused of supporting one side or the other.
“The primary goal for the UAE in Sudan has been about political influence in a strategically very important country,” said Andreas Krieg, a Middle East security specialist at King’s College London.
Emirati state-affiliated companies look at Sudan as a hub for investment in resources, minerals and trade more generally, he said.
Sudan researcher Hamid Khalafallah said the desert UAE is interested in natural resources it lacks, including minerals and arable land.
From Libya to Somalia, “we see a pattern of the UAE working with paramilitaries” to exploit the continent’s resources, he said.
Development group Swissaid estimated in a report last year that in 2022, 66.5 percent of African gold exports to the UAE had been smuggled out.
The UAE, a major hub for the gold trade, is the world’s top buyer of the precious metal from Sudan, a sector largely controlled by Daglo.
But Federico Donelli, a professor of international relations at Italy’s University of Trieste, said it would be “too simplistic” to say the UAE’s interests were all about gold.
Abu Dhabi is also seeking to counter Saudi influence in Sudan and prevent the spread of political Islam, which it sees as a threat to its security, he said.
What links to the RSF?
Gulf ties to Sudan’s military stem from cooperation in Yemen, after Khartoum joined the Saudi-led coalition fighting a civil war there in 2015.
Burhan led the Sudanese who fought under the Saudis, while Daglo’s RSF were deployed with soldiers from the UAE, Donelli earlier told the Nordic Africa Institute.
Rifts have since emerged between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, traditionally close allies. UAE support for Daglo, though denied by the Emiratis, serves “to challenge Saudi objectives”, Donelli said.
The relationship is also ideological, with the RSF willing to contain the Muslim Brotherhood political movement, which is outlawed by the UAE and other Arab states, Krieg said.
This sets the RSF apart from the army, which has been linked with remnants of the Islamist regime of former dictator Omar al-Bashir.
Both sides have faced claims of war crimes during Sudan’s bitter conflict, which has killed tens of thousands of people and uprooted more than 12 million.
But in January, Washington accused the RSF of genocide for targeting ethnic groups with mass killings and gang rapes.
Also in January, two US lawmakers said the UAE had broken its promises to stop providing military aid to the RSF.
Daglo’s private finances are run from the UAE, Krieg said, adding that he had become “co-dependent” on Abu Dhabi.
The RSF has received crucial support from the UAE, including arms deliveries through neighbouring Chad, diplomats, analysts and human rights groups say.
The UAE denies the allegations.
Will the case affect the UAE?
Sudan filed its case against the UAE at the ICJ, the top UN court in The Hague, on Thursday, claiming complicity in genocide over Abu Dhabi’s alleged support for the RSF.
The UAE dismissed the case as a “publicity stunt” and said it would try to have it thrown out.
ICJ rulings are legally binding, but the court has no power to enforce them.
Donelli said the case was likely to cause reputational damage to the UAE.
“Both internationally and within Africa, there is an increasing perception of the Emirates as a destabilising actor,” he told AFP.
But “the financial and political prominence that the UAE has gained over the past decade will likely shield it from any serious repercussions”.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)