Tensions between Sudan and Ethiopia are moving into a more dangerous phase after Khartoum accused Addis Ababa of allowing its territory to be used as bases for drones operated by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which have been at war with the Sudanese army for more than three years.
Addis Ababa responded with counter-accusations against Khartoum, alleging support for the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, which opposes the Ethiopian government.
The developments come amid warnings of a possible explosion in tensions along the Sudan-Ethiopia border and fears they could develop into a military confrontation, particularly after Khartoum recalled its ambassador to Addis Ababa, Al-Zain Ibrahim Hussein, and threatened, through Foreign Minister Mohi al-Din Salim during a press conference last Tuesday to respond “in kind”.
Meanwhile, military movements and preparations emerged over the past two days in Sudan’s eastern states bordering Ethiopia, which observers say could lead to further developments if diplomatic solutions fail to calm the escalating tensions.
As for the war in Sudan, RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, declared on Thursday that “his forces are prepared to continue fighting until 2040 if circumstances require”.
Sudanese website Al-Rakoba reported that Hemedti said during a speech on Wednesday to his forces that “army estimates indicate the war could continue until 2033”, stressing his commitment to continuing military operations against the Sudanese army.
He also held “the armed forces leadership responsible for the continuation of the conflict and refusal to engage in peace efforts”, asserting that his forces had consistently sought to end the conflict, adding, “We in the Rapid Support Forces seek to stop the war tonight before tomorrow, but can a war stop from one side alone?”
He stressed that ending the conflict requires commitment from all parties, saying his side requires a “radical solution” that guarantees conflicts will not recur in the future, stressing his rejection of a return to the pre-war situation.
Sudan-Ethiopia disputes reignite
Drone attacks launched by the RSF on Khartoum on Monday were enough to reignite disputes between the Sudanese and Ethiopian governments.
This was underscored by the Sudanese foreign minister’s announcement on the same day that strategic drones belonging to the RSF had departed from Ethiopia’s Bahir Dar airport with funding from the UAE.
According to the Sudanese government, the drone attacks recently targeted Khartoum airport, as well as sites in previous attacks inside White Nile and Blue Nile states in southeastern Sudan, where the RSF announced coordinated attacks from several fronts late last month, in addition to North and South Kordofan states.
The forces also attacked Sudanese troops in the border town of Kurmuk between Sudan and Ethiopia during recent battles there. The town fell to the RSF on 24 March.
Ethiopia’s foreign ministry denied the accusations in a statement on Tuesday, instead accusing the Sudanese army of involvement with “mercenaries of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front” in the ongoing conflict and of providing weapons and financial support to them, facilitating incursions along Ethiopia’s western border.
It said the activity of Tigray fighters in Sudan was “documented publicly” and that the government possessed reliable evidence indicating Sudan had become a base for anti-Ethiopian forces operating against it.
For its part, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front rejected the Ethiopian foreign ministry’s accusations in a statement on Wednesday, 6 May, denying cooperation with the Sudanese government to destabilise the region.
It said the allegations were baseless, irresponsible, and reflected a recurring pattern of disinformation through misleading information.
The group stressed that at a time when the region requires restraint and constructive engagement, such claims only inflame tensions and obscure the urgent need for accountability and genuine peace efforts.
It stressed that it had neither participated in nor supported any activities undermining regional stability, warning that “escalatory rhetoric, external interventions, and opportunistic alliances” linked to competing regional agendas reflected short-sighted calculations threatening long-term peace.
It added that such actions not only strain relations with neighbouring countries, but also risk entrenching Ethiopia in conflicts that do not serve the interests of its people.
Military preparations on the border
The tensions between Sudan and Ethiopia have prompted military preparations by the Sudanese army and allied forces in the eastern states.
Sudan’s Kassala, Gedaref, Sennar and Blue Nile states all share borders with Ethiopia, stretching approximately 769 kilometres.
In this context, the Sudanese army’s Fourth Infantry Division in Damazin, in the Blue Nile region, announced that its forces were prepared for any potential threats.
In a statement issued overnight into Thursday, it said its forces were in a state of full readiness, constant vigilance and capable of dealing with various challenges within their area of responsibility.
It added that troops on the ground were working with determination to secure the region, protect civilians and confront any “potential threat”.
The command of the army’s Second Infantry Division in Gedaref State also announced on Tuesday that division commander Major General Youssef Mohamed Ahmed had conducted a series of field inspection visits covering the operational base in Qureisha, the “Tabarak Allah” sector, and the Doka operational base, all near the Ethiopian border.
It added that the visit aimed to assess the morale of soldiers stationed at advanced positions.
The division commander stressed the combat readiness and full alertness of forces in those vital sectors and declared that the Second Division would remain the protective shield and painful strike against anyone “lying in wait for the nation’s security”.
As part of these border preparations, the Eastern Battalion Forces, an armed group allied with the Sudanese army, announced on Tuesday that it had raised the level of readiness and maximum alert across all units and deployment positions while suspending leave and unnecessary movements and repositioning according to operational requirements.
The forces, stationed in eastern Sudan, stressed their rejection of any foreign intervention in Sudan’s internal affairs under any pretext.
They said that amid rapid security and military developments and possible threats in the eastern region, including the use of drones and attacks on some sites from outside the border, they were closely monitoring the field situation and continuously evaluating all possible scenarios.
The group also declared its commitment to operating under the leadership of the Sudanese army and dealing firmly with any threat to Sudan’s security or stability, adding that it was “at the highest levels of readiness to carry out the tasks assigned to it at any time”.
Threats to national security
Sudanese political science professor Al-Nazir Mohamed Al-Toum told The New Arab that “the notable aspect of the latest escalation is that it has moved beyond its traditional context of border disputes, demographic overlap and water competition, which have remained politically and legally unresolved, into the realm of geopolitical and regional escalation”.
He noted that with the Sudan war entering its fourth year and Ethiopia’s crisis involving conflict between Amhara and Tigray forces against the central government entering its sixth year, “we find ourselves facing a reality threatening the national security of both countries and the security of the entire region”.
He argued that the Sudanese government’s recall of its diplomatic representative from Addis Ababa, “despite being repeated as a form of protest, comes this time in a different context, coinciding with fierce military battles inside Sudan and direct mutual accusations of logistical and human support, with each side claiming the other has become a centre for hostile forces”.
Al-Toum said that regardless of the accuracy of the claims, the danger lies in the transformation of the long border into a stage for “proxy wars”, opening the door to “empowering militias and counter-militias and supporting pockets of opposition to the central authority on both sides”.
He also argued that “this escalation tempts military actors to exploit opportunities, as Ethiopian Shifta militias active along the Sudan border and Amhara forces may seek to impose a new reality in the Greater and Lesser Fashaga areas in Gedaref state, exploiting the Sudanese army’s distraction”.
Al-Toum warned that continued escalation or a break in relations “would deepen regional polarisation, particularly amid tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea, potentially turning eastern Sudan into an arena for settling regional scores”.
He added that Sudan’s current weakness and inability to sustain another military front or secure full sovereignty heightened the risks.
He also said, “This tension casts negative shadows over the future of final negotiations regarding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam”.
Al-Toum said field reports and Sudanese accusations concerning the use of Bahir Dar airport as a base for drones targeting Khartoum indicate Addis Ababa may be resorting to a strategy of “escaping forward”.
He explained that the Ethiopian government, facing rebellion in the Amhara region by Fano militias, may seek to turn Sudan into a theatre for securing its internal front through a “trade-off of influence”, namely, supporting armed activity in Sudan in exchange for guarantees that Sudan would not support Fano or Tigray militias.
In addition, Al-Toum said the Fashaga dispute represents a “winning card for appeasing Ethiopian public opinion, particularly among the Amhara, while economic and political pressures could push Ethiopia to provide logistical support to one side in Sudan’s conflict in exchange for easing those pressures.”
Al-Toum argued that the current escalation “has gone beyond traditional border skirmishes to become a threat of direct confrontation militarily, diplomatically and legally”.
He added that “the continuation of war in Sudan and unrest in Ethiopia leaves the parties with zero-sum options for acting against each other.”
According to Al-Toum, this comes “amid a loss of internal balance that has made both states vulnerable to being used as proxies for settling regional and international power struggles, especially in the context of competition over Red Sea influence and ports”.
He added that “if proven, Ethiopian intervention stems from internal weakness and a desperate attempt to secure borders and satisfy allies”.
In his view, “the only way out remains achieving peace in Sudan and addressing disputes with neighbouring countries through political and legal means, because continuing direct confrontation would inevitably turn Sudan into a rear arena for ethnic conflicts and growing regional ambitions”.
Retired officer Hassan Ibrahim also ruled out a direct clash between the Sudanese and Ethiopian armies on the border, telling The New Arab that Sudan and Ethiopia “are engaged in internal conflicts and neither has the interest or capacity to open a new front in difficult areas such as eastern Sudan and western Ethiopia”.
He expected the conflict for now to remain confined to mutual support for militias and intensified border skirmishes, particularly since “the Blue Nile region bordering Ethiopia is witnessing continuous activity by the RSF and its ally, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, which recently captured the town of Kurmuk very close to the Ethiopian border”.
According to Ibrahim, this means the forces “have opened a direct route enabling them to use Ethiopian territory to launch drone attacks as happened recently”.
He also pointed out that “Ethiopian militias such as the Tigray Front already have relations with the Sudanese government”.
At the same time, he noted that “proxy battles are expected and may escalate in the coming days, particularly in the Blue Nile region”.
Article translated from Arabic by Afrah Almatwari. To read the original, click here.
