The bourgeois media report daily on the massacres in Gaza and Ukraine, describing them as national, racial, and religious conflicts, which we Marxists instead define as imperialist, for the strategic control of territories and resources by enormous economic interests guaranteed by states.

In many countries, large masses have mobilized against the extermination in Gaza. Here, the major imperialist bourgeoisies have agreed to a semblance of a truce, which, however, claims victims every day, with the Israeli army on one side and Hamas on the other undisturbed in killing Palestinians.

On the conflict in Sudan, however, they remain silent.

The country became independent in December 1956 with the withdrawal of British and Egyptian forces that had occupied it since 1898, the date of the historic battle of Omdurman, which marked the end of the Mahdist revolt led by Sudanese rebels (nicknamed “dervishes”), followers of Muhammad Ahmad (the “Mahdi”).

The Republic of Sudan was immediately threatened by rivalries between the northern and southern provinces. Marked differences in social development and racial antagonisms divide the populations of the northern provinces, composed of Arabs and Nubians of the Muslim religion, from those of the south, who are black and live mainly in Equatoria and Upper Nile. Since then, a series of coups d’état has changed the leadership, but has not solved any problems, least of all that of the three southern provinces.

From Programma Comunista no. 19 of 1971, we read: "The Umma Party, representing the interests of landowners in the south, and the Unionist Party, representing the interests of the bourgeoisie in the north, have alternated in government, serving in turn the interests of imperialist powers that were soon reduced to three: the United States, Germany, and the USSR. In May 1969, with the rise to power of Gaafar Muhammad an-Numeiry and Awadallah, it seemed that the balance would finally tip in favor of the USSR; the breakdown of relations with the United States and Germany, accused of instigating southern separatism, the rapprochement with Nasser’s UAR, and the diplomatic and commercial relations established with the countries of the Moscow area and with China seemed to confirm this reversal. Mahjub’s Sudanese Communist Party itself supported Numeiry, albeit ‘critically’, and the diplomatic frenzy led the President of the new Republic, Awdallah, to say that ‘our socialism is specifically Sudanese and it is on the basis of our own traditions that we will build the new Sudan’, while Numeiry professed to be ‘a moderate socialist who believes in Arab nationalism’. Soon, however, the inconsistency not only of yet another ‘national path to socialism’ but of the very ‘path’ to the country’s economic and social development was revealed in all its harshness, with the political incapacity of the Sudanese bourgeoisie and the failure of Moscow’s foreign policy. The famous ‘mines’ exploded repeatedly.

In fact, Sudan would have a future of instability. Various wars followed, causing death, famine, and destruction. What is known as the second civil war, from 1983 to 2005, caused about 1.9 million deaths and over 4 million refugees.

After further conflicts, we arrive at the period between January 9 and 15, 2011, when a referendum was held in South Sudan on secession from the North and the creation of an independent state. The consultation was already part of the 2005 Naivasha Agreement between the Khartoum government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M). A simultaneous referendum was held in the province of Abyei to choose whether to be part of South Sudan or remain in Sudan. Nevertheless, the region remained disputed and effectively subject to joint control.

On February 7, 2011, Sudanese President Omar Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir, formalizing the results of the referendum, proclaimed the birth of the State of South Sudan, which thus became the 54th African state. On July 9, after a trial period, South Sudan’s independence was proclaimed and immediately recognized by the Khartoum government.

But the new small state quickly plunged back into war, fought between 2013 and 2018 between forces loyal to President Salva Kiir and those linked to Vice President Riek Machar, which caused at least 400,000 deaths and forced 4 million inhabitants, out of a population of just over 12 million, to flee their homes.

What is being fought in Sudan today is a proxy war, with regional imperialist bourgeoisies competing for the resources of a country rich in gold and raw materials.

Egypt and Eritrea support General Al-Burhan’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and his government based in Port Sudan, while Ethiopia, in conflict with Egypt over the GERD dam, supports Hemedti (RSF), Burhan’s former deputy in the previous military junta, together with the Central African Republic and Chad.

The United Arab Emirates, which is one of the largest importers of gold from the mines of Darfur, sends weapons, via the Central African Republic and Chad, to the RSF forces, which have been given economic and military support, including training and logistical support. In return, they have been involved in operations against Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Iran, on the other hand, a supporter of the Houthis, in order to counter Emirati influence and expand its presence in the Red Sea region, supplies drones to the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by al-Burhan.

Saudi Arabia, competing with the Emirates for hegemony over the Red Sea, officially acts as a mediator between the contenders, but in reality maintains close relations with the SAF, partly in gratitude for the support received from Sudanese mercenaries in the war against the Houthi rebels.

Russia is also very active on the ground. In 2017, it managed to reach an agreement for the construction of a naval base on the Sudanese coast of the Red Sea, but this has encountered several obstacles over the years and, as we write, we learn from the Russian ambassador in Khartoum, Andrei Chernovol, that its construction has been suspended due to the deterioration of internal security in Sudan.

China is also involved. According to various sources, it has invested $3 billion in oil fields and pipelines that transport crude oil from northern Sudan to Port Sudan, becoming a leading trading partner for Sudan.

Finally, the United States, while declaring itself neutral, aims to counter the growing Russian, Chinese, and Iranian influence in the region.

In short, it is a web of bourgeois interests in which none of the major world powers are missing, except for a now powerless Europe, without any economic or military strength to show in this conflict.

On September 12, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States announced a plan to end the conflict, providing for a three-month truce followed by a ceasefire and a political transition process.

But on October 26, with the conquest of the city of El-Fasher, the RSF regained control of the entire western region of Darfur, also maintaining control over large areas of the south of the country, while the Sudanese army controls the northern, eastern, and central regions along the Nile and the Red Sea. The RSF continued its massacres, killing hundreds of civilians, proving once again that scores are settled with the force of arms and not with useless pieces of paper in the form of improbable ‘roadmaps’, and always at the expense of the poor proletariat.

On April 22, the ISPI website stated: ’The war in Sudan has generated a humanitarian crisis that immediately proved to be extremely serious. Of a population that exceeded 45 million before the war began, 30 million are identified by the United Nations as in need of humanitarian assistance and nearly 25 million are exposed to high levels of food insecurity, while famine has been confirmed in some areas of Darfur and the Nuba Mountains. 12.6 million people have been forcibly displaced by the conflict: of these, 3.8 million have sought refuge in neighboring countries, mainly Egypt (1.5 million), South Sudan (1 million, mostly South Sudanese forced to return to the country from which they had previously fled) and Chad (over 770,000).

On October 21, Avvenire published a utopian appeal from the Comboni missionaries working there: “Italy must take civilians away from the hell of Darfur”. "In the city of El Fasher, besieged for 18 months, 260,000 people are at risk of starvation. Supplies of animal feed distributed to the population have also run out. El Fasher is the capital of hell. Half of them, 130,000, are children (...) A veil of silence has fallen over a civil conflict ignored by the media and the international community, which has caused the greatest humanitarian crisis on the planet with 14 million displaced persons and refugees and 26 million people starving".

This is how capitalism treats the proletariat of the world: it exploits them in their work or condemns them to death!

The wicked war for the division of Sudan’s rich underground resources has caused hundreds of thousands of victims and the worst atrocities over the years. We wrote about this in 2019 in issue 396 of our newspaper. "The pro-government Janjawid militias were engaged in fighting the separatism of the animist and Christian populations of the Darfur region, supported by the United States and Israel. RSF terrorism was used to try to stop a movement that had upset the old political balance in the country and had already led to the removal from power last April of President Omar al-Bashir, who was linked to the Muslim Brotherhood but also had good relations with Russia and China".

The capitalist mode of production now has nothing to offer the proletariat and the dispossessed of the world but suffering and death, in an attempt to survive its own self-destruction. The only salvation is its annihilation through proletarian revolution.