Praise and Criticism

Kenya’s handling of the Sudan Peace Process has been met with both praise and criticism, particularly regarding its engagement with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Sudanese authorities have protested Kenya’s hosting of RSF and its activities within Kenya, raising concerns about potential bias. 

Kenya, on the other hand, has defended its position, citing diplomatic engagement, including a call with U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, to clarify its stance. However, Kenya must articulate its intervention more clearly, owning the narrative and ensuring its actions align first with Kenya’s interests and then with the Sudanese people.

The conflict in Sudan began on April 15, 2023, between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the RSF, commanded by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti). The war has since resulted in over 12,000 deaths and displaced more than 7 million people, according to the United Nations. 

Entire cities, including Khartoum, have been devastated, with vital infrastructure, hospitals, and power plants reduced to rubble. Reports from organizations such as Amnesty International and the UN have documented widespread atrocities, including mass killings, sexual violence, and forced starvation.

Strategic Communication in Diplomacy

Kenya has no choice but to deploy strategic communication machinery to win support for the peace process, inform on the core issues, influence negotiations in a way that best serves the people, and garner international goodwill. 

Effective public diplomacy should explain the intricacies of the war and clarify Kenya’s role as a peace broker rather than a meddler. 

Kenya’s leadership must also highlight the cost of war: beyond the loss of life, the Sudanese economy has collapsed, with oil revenues plummeting, businesses shuttered, and food shortages reaching crisis levels. 

The UN reports that over 25 million people—more than half of Sudan’s population—require humanitarian aid, while the World Food Programme warns of famine conditions in conflict-hit areas.

Reputational Risk for Kenya

A major reputational risk for Kenya is the perception that it is aligning with RSF, a group accused of severe human rights violations, including genocide in Darfur.

Internationally recognized cartoonist Gado recently captured this concern in a controversial piece, highlighting fears that Kenya’s involvement could taint its credibility. Sudanese Foreign Minister Ali Al-Sadiq has accused Kenya of bias, while SAF leaders have voiced strong opposition to Nairobi’s role as mediator. 

Kenya must ensure that its peace efforts remain above board, transparent, and free from narrow interests that could undermine its moral standing. Past diplomatic missteps, such as Kenya’s handling of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) crisis and public pronouncements on Goma, should serve as lessons. 

Kenya’s intervention in Sudan must be expertly informed by conflict resolution specialists, diplomats, and multilateral organizations like the UN and AU. 

The war in Sudan, much like the war in Ukraine, deserves global attention, yet it has been largely ignored—a reality some argue is rooted in racial biases. Kenya must use its influence to highlight the devastating cost of war and expose those profiting from the suffering of Sudanese civilians, including arms dealers and corrupt military elites.

As Kenya moves forward, it must reinforce its position as a credible peace negotiator. 

By proactively shaping the narrative, addressing reputational concerns, and ensuring transparency in its engagement, Kenya can effectively steer the peace process in a direction that benefits Sudan and the broader region.

Gem Musings is an International and Public Affairs Analyst with expertise in diplomacy, conflict resolution, communications, and African geopolitics.