How to respond to the protests in Sudan? The case for a responsible approach to armed intervention

Nearly nine years on from the self-immolation of Mohammed Bouazizi, the Tunisian fruit seller whose treatment by state officials kickstarted the ‘Arab Spring’, protests are once again gripping several Arab countries. Demonstrations in Algeria and Sudan have ousted the authoritarian leaders of their countries – Algerian president Abdelaziz Bouteflika in April, and Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese dictator, on 11th April.

In Sudan, protests continue as civilians call for total regime change. Sudanese security forces have reportedly killed tens or hundreds of peaceful protesters, with rape and other methods of torture used as an act of repression, in violation of international law. A transition agreement between protesters and the army looks shaky, and the risk of conflict escalation remains high.

Should tensions escalate, the international community could be pushed towards intervention by the UN’s ‘Responsibility to Protect’ commitment. However, for the UK government, lessons from the failures of the Iraq War and intervention in Libya are still fresh. How can the UK learn from these lessons whilst continuing to stand up for international law and norms?

Military Intervention?

Since the British invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the mass public opposition that accompanied it, the UK government has been reluctant to spearhead protracted international interventions. During the Arab Spring, whilst the UK and France were the primary backers of the NATO coalition’s intervention in Libya to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1973, they were quick to withdraw. The coalition has since drawn criticism for lacking a well thought-out plan for the post-Gaddafi transition of Libya.

These criticisms have left the UK government and public opinion reluctant to support armed intervention. In 2018, 52% of British adults said they opposed military intervention in other countries, with only 27% in favour. 2019 polling conducted on behalf of the BFPG found that only 16% of British adults view war as an important international issue.

However, the government has continued to uphold its commitments to UN peacekeeping missions. The UK currently has about 600 personnel deployed on UN peacekeeping operations and is the sixth largest contributor to the UN peacekeeping budget. Petitions calling on the UK to act on Sudan and for the UN to investigate human rights violations collectively garnered nearly 800,000 signatures, suggesting the public would sanction a UN-backed operation.

Towards a responsible approach

What more can the UK do to protect civilians in Sudan and similar situations? First, it could help to increase national awareness of the UK’s commitments and capacity to enforce these norms. The UK has a privileged position as a permanent member of the Security Council, and it could use this to lobby for and seek international support for missions to protect civilians.

Secondly, care and responsibility could be taken to ensure missions are well-executed and structures are put in place for military withdrawal and transition, avoiding the mistakes of the Libyan conflict. Finally, the government could benefit from the development of a long-term Middle East Strategy, enabling foreign policy to respond more strategically to crises rather than lurching from crisis to crisis.

By harnessing the best of our international capacity and hard and soft power reserves, the UK has the potential to become a world leader in standing up for international law and the protection of civilians in dangerous, high-tension situations like Sudan – provided its response is well-planned, strategised, and sanctioned by the UN.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the BFPG.