Basic

A political row has erupted following the claim that the Emirati Ambassador Hamad Al-Janaibi’s residence in Khartoum was hit by an air strike carried out by the Sudanese army. In a statement, the Sudan government denied firing at or damaging the building. “The armed forces do not carry out these cowardly acts and do not violate international law but only target areas where the militia is present and that is within its right to defend the Sudanese nation.”

The sharp condemnation came from the Gulf countries; Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar and even Turkiye, although no country explicitly named the Sudanese army as the perpetrator. Aerial photographs published on 1 October and pictures taken outside the house days later appear to show no visible signs of damage to the building. The building remains in an area controlled by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

On 29 September, the UAE’s Foreign Ministry said a Sudanese military aircraft had attacked the residence of its ambassador in Al Amarat Street No.9 causing significant damage to the building. “The United Arab Emirates has strongly condemned the heinous attack that targeted the residence of the UAE Head of Mission in Khartoum by a Sudanese army aircraft, which resulted in extensive damage to the building. The UAE has called on the army to assume full responsibility for this cowardly act,” the ministry said.

The statement added that the UAE plans to submit formal letters of protest to the League of Arab States, the African Union and the United Nations, accusing the Sudanese Armed Forces of violating the principle of diplomatic inviolability. “The Ministry expressed its strong condemnation of these criminal acts and its permanent rejection of all forms of violence and terrorism aimed at destabilising security and stability, in contravention of international law,” the statement read.

The accusations have pushed diplomatic tensions between the two countries to a new high. It follows Sudan’s documented claim that the United Arab Emirates is supporting the RSF militarily. The claim includes evidence presented by Sudan to the United Nations Security Council that the Emirates is using relief services in Chad to illegally smuggle arms into RSF forces. The exposure of the covert operation has added weight to the case being raised by the Sudan government in the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Read: UAE diplomatic mission leaves Sudan as pressure to declare RSF a terrorist organisation mounts

At the time of writing, Sudanese officials say they fully expect the United Arab Emirates to issue a retraction or apology for its baseless accusations. Sources further suggest the UAE was wrongly informed about the incident after a confusion in intelligence gathering. The building is owned by a Sudanese businessman, Jamal Zamkan, who was killed by the RSF after he refused to vacate his house adjacent to the Emirates ambassador’s residence. A close friend of Jamal, Zahir Abdur Rahman, told the media that the owner of the house was killed when a gang of around 16 men from the RSF stormed his home. Abdur Rahman further claimed that the UAE government has not paid the outstanding rent on the property.

Commentators believe that the accusations made against the Sudan government was an attempt to mobilise international opposition and to discredit the government. This comes at a time when the RSF suffered some significant losses in Khartoum, Medani and Sennar.  However, in an unexpected comment made by UAE presidential adviser, Anwar Gargash, the diplomat appears to soften the position of the Emirates. “In light of the wars and crises that threaten Arab and regional security, we have no choice but to restore the concept of the nation state and respect its independence and sovereignty. The era of militias with its sectarian and regional dimensions has cost the Arabs dearly and burdened the region,” he said on X. “The future is for security, peace and prosperity with an independent Arab project that is reconciled with its surroundings,” he added.

Commentators say the silence on the events around the supposed attack on the ambassador’s house in Sudan suggest a move to tone down the rhetoric against Sudan. His comments appear to signal a willingness for the Emirates to change its aggressive stance in Sudan. Since 2018, the Emirates is reported to have invested over $6 million to expand its influence in Sudan in addition to the billions of dollars spent in Africa. UAE involvement has been noted in Somalia, Eritrea and Ethiopia.

Analysts believe that Western governments and some Gulf states have long regarded the removal of the former President Omar Al-Bashir as an opportunity to ensure that another Islamic oriented government never comes to power again.Geo-politicians, such as Samdi Hamdi, have argued that the UAE with the tacit approval of the American government has been trying to orchestrate a ‘colour revolution’ to ensure that Sudan does not choose its own government. He argues that Sudan’s demand for civilian rule threatens the role of the monarchies in the Gulf.

Whatever the outcome of the latest political differences between the UAE and Sudan, it is clear that the Sudan government is more determined than ever before to resist an attempt to interfere in its internal politics or to be derailed by baseless accusations.