5 Motivations That Led Saudi Arabia to Lead Mediation to Stop the War in Sudan

In an approach that transcends traditional diplomacy, Saudi Arabia is moving in the Sudan file as a regional power seeking to reshape the balance of influence in the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa. Since the fall of the city of El Fasher to the Rapid Support Forces and the accompanying documented massacres, Sudan has become a direct test of Riyadh's ability and that of its partners in the Quartet to stop a war that is turning into an open regional disaster, according to analyses by political researchers for "Al Arabiya.net".

Riyadh is leading the initiative between the two warring parties to spare Sudan the dangers of division and to end the war through five motivations embodied in: "opening the way for a political solution - reaching a comprehensive national solution - stopping external support for the warring parties - protecting regional security - ensuring the security of the Red Sea," which researchers confirm.

"Engineering Diplomacy"

Dr. Mona Abdel Fattah, a researcher in international relations and diplomacy, explains that the Kingdom adopts an approach closer to "engineering diplomacy" that rearranges crisis pathways through multi-layered alliance networks, granting it a role that transcends traditional mediation and solidifying its position as a player that regulates the strategic rhythm in its vital surroundings.

Riyadh and the Stability of Khartoum

In Riyadh's view, the Sudanese war does not represent just an internal conflict, but a geopolitical knot whose effects intertwine from the Red Sea to the African interior. The stability of Sudan is considered a direct guarantee for the security of maritime corridors and the enhancement of Vision 2030 projects along the western coast. The Kingdom sees the Red Sea not just as a maritime passage but as a strategic space where its ability to protect its interests and arrange regional balances is tested.

Saudi Arabia: Events in Sudan Threaten Regional Stability

Riyadh emphasizes the importance of stopping external support for the warring parties, considering this step "an essential matter that must be taken to create a real environment for a ceasefire and open the way for a comprehensive political solution," stressing that the solution to the crisis lies in a Sudanese-Sudanese political solution that respects Sudan's sovereignty and unity and supports Sudanese state institutions. The Saudi Foreign Ministry states that what is happening in Sudan does not only affect the people of Sudan but threatens regional stability and Arab and African national security as well.

At Saudi Request: U.S. Commitment to the Sudan File

From this perspective, Riyadh elevated the Sudan file to a presidential level through the meeting between Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and former U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House. According to the New York Times, the briefing provided by the Crown Prince regarding the seriousness of the situation in Sudan prompted the Trump administration to take immediate action to reset the course of the conflict, after Sudan had been off Washington's priorities for a long time.

Riyadh and the Turning Point

In this context, Alan Boswell, the director for the Horn of Africa at the International Crisis Group, considered the Saudi intervention a turning point in the course of the war if translated into practical pressures on the regional parties involved in fueling the conflict. Meanwhile, Sudanese researcher Kouskondi Abdel Shafi warned that any U.S. move without a strong envoy for Sudan could lead the country back into the circle of international neglect.

Although the war in Sudan has claimed more than 150,000 lives according to independent estimates, international capitals have dealt with it with a significant degree of indifference, according to researchers' views, before the White House meeting between the Crown Prince and Trump brought about a qualitative change in the U.S. approach. Saudi Arabia, which directly overlooks the Sudanese coasts via the Red Sea, sent a clear message to America that the continuation of the war represents a direct threat to its regional security.

U.S. Promises Regarding Sudan's Stability

Trump acknowledged that Sudan "was not on his maps" before he admitted that the Crown Prince's remarks completely changed his perspective, confirming that he received a detailed explanation from him about the history and local context of the conflict, which led him to pledge "something very strong" regarding Sudan. In a subsequent post on Truth Social, the U.S. president promised to work with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt to stop the "atrocities" and launch a path to restore stability.

Khartoum Back in the Spotlight of International Attention

On the other hand, Dr. Mona Abdel Fattah believes that the recent U.S. commitment, in response to the Saudi Crown Prince's request, raises the ceiling of international interest and gives new momentum to the Quartet's efforts. In her opinion, this move expands Saudi Arabia's ability to exert direct pressure on the supporters of the Sudanese parties and opens the door for a humanitarian truce that forms a preliminary basis for a broader political process, provided that civil forces and Sudanese political institutions are integrated into any transitional arrangements to ensure sustainable stability.

She also emphasizes that the U.S. focus on the humanitarian aspect reflects an awareness of the scale of the disaster in Sudan, but the success of this approach remains linked to the response of the warring parties, as previous experiences in the Jeddah track have shown.

Dr. Mona Abdel Fattah concludes that Saudi mediation remains the primary lever for any possible solution, as Riyadh possesses a network of relationships that extends across military, political, and tribal actors, allowing it to provide mutual guarantees to the warring parties and guide the political path toward a stable settlement.

She confirms that through this role, Saudi Arabia does not seek to contain a transient crisis but to establish a new model for regional mediation that balances the protection of its national security, its commitments to its international partners, and its independence in managing regional files. If the current initiative succeeds in establishing a humanitarian truce and then launching a political path leading to civilian rule, it will represent an important shift in the engineering of regional security. Conversely, its failure would mean the continuation of massacres in Darfur and the spread of instability on both sides of the Red Sea, making the success of this path a regional necessity, not just a diplomatic gain, according to her view.