WHY DOES SUDAN REJECT THE US' PEACE PLAN?

For Sudan's army chief and head of state Abdulfattah Al-Burhan, the US-backed "peace" proposal isn't diplomacy, it's a surrender document dressed up as negotiation.

A central problem is the UAE's role. Everyone knows the UAE arms and funds the g*nocidal Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a militia that openly vows to destroy the Sudanese state. Yet Washington insists on Abu Dhabi sitting at the negotiating table.

Al-Burhan says the plan demands the dismantling of Sudan's national army while rewarding the RSF by allowing them to remain in areas they have violently occupied. And that mirrors the UAE's agenda: weaken the only institution capable of resisting the RSF and impose a puppet force that enables Emirati control over Sudan.

He also criticised US envoy Massad Boulos for "speaking with the tongue of the UAE," exposing the apparent lack of neutrality in Washington's approach. The US's refusal to publicly challenge, let alone sanction, its Emirati ally shows where its loyalties lie.

Predictably, the UAE responded with gaslighting, accusing Al-Burhan of blocking peace. But their version of peace means Sudan accepting an agreement that would end with the state's collapse and the RSF's victory.

Given US alignment with the UAE, it is no surprise the so-called peace plan is seen in Sudan as a demand for unconditional surrender and as an insult to a population that overwhelmingly rejects coexistence with a militia responsible for some of the most brutal atrocities of the 21st century.