As aid commitments pour in, the absence of Sudanese voices and diplomatic unity clouds hopes for ending Africa’s worst humanitarian crisis
London Conference Rallies Support — But Stops Short of a Breakthrough
On the two-year mark of Sudan’s devastating civil war, international powers convened in London to deliver a strong message of humanitarian support — but hopes for diplomatic progress were dashed. Britain and the European Union led a pledge of over $1 billion in aid to Sudan and its neighboring countries, aiming to ease the immense suffering caused by a war that has displaced 14 million and plunged vast regions into famine.
The conference, co-hosted by the UK, EU, France, Germany, and the African Union, brought together Western diplomats and global institutions. Yet, glaringly absent were representatives from Sudan — neither the Sudanese military nor the rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) were invited.
While the event signaled international attention to the crisis, it ended without a joint communique or coordinated roadmap toward peace. The final statement merely acknowledged regional efforts and reiterated calls for a ceasefire.
“Patient Diplomacy” in the Face of Escalating Violence
UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy struck a somber tone during the summit, admitting that “many have given up on Sudan” and warned that peace would require “renewed international effort and patient diplomacy.” He pointed to the lack of political will among the warring factions as the greatest obstacle to progress.
The pledges included €522 million ($590 million) from the EU and £120 million ($158 million) from the UK. Despite the substantial figures, critics said the event fell short. Advocacy group Avaaz called the conference a “damp squib,” accusing Lammy of failing to meet the moment in the absence of U.S. leadership.
“The foreign secretary promised Sudan would not be forgotten. Today was a test of that commitment — and he failed dismally,” said Will Davies, head of Avaaz’s Sudan team.
A War Without End — and a Humanitarian Crisis Without Borders
The war in Sudan began on April 15, 2023, when tensions between the Sudanese military and the RSF exploded into armed conflict in Khartoum. Since then, at least 20,000 people have been killed — likely more — and millions have been forced from their homes. The military recently reclaimed the capital, but the RSF retains control over Darfur and other territories.
In just one weekend in April, over 300 civilians were killed in Darfur, the United Nations reported. More than 3 million people have fled to neighboring countries like Chad and Egypt. Aid groups warn that the conflict risks igniting regional instability, especially in South Sudan, where refugee influxes strain already limited resources.
Oxfam cautioned that the humanitarian disaster is on the verge of becoming a broader regional emergency, deepening tensions and threatening fragile peace agreements in neighboring nations.
Muted Diplomacy and Divided Influence
While Western nations issued strong appeals, they wield limited leverage. Real influence lies with regional players like Egypt, which has long-standing ties with Sudan’s army, and the UAE, accused of arming the RSF — allegations it continues to deny.
Sudan’s military government openly criticized the conference for inviting the UAE while excluding Sudanese representation altogether. UAE diplomat Lana Nusseibeh acknowledged atrocities committed by both sides and urged an end to attacks on civilians, aid workers, and infrastructure.
Though the United States sent a representative, its presence was muted amid drastically reduced foreign aid programs. Meanwhile, the UK has slashed its aid budget to fund military spending. Despite this, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer insists Sudan remains a priority alongside Gaza and Ukraine.
A Missed Opportunity for Unity
Despite raising over £813 million (more than $1 billion), the London conference ultimately fell short of forging a path to peace. As the conflict enters its third year with no end in sight, millions of Sudanese civilians continue to suffer — and the world must ask whether pledges without diplomacy are enough.