In the 1990s, Sudan entered one of its darkest chapters of international isolation, when Khartoum became a haven for extremists under the rule of the defunct National Congress Party and the Muslim Brotherhood. What followed was a cycle of sanctions, pariah status, and economic collapse. This was not a mere political deviation, but a descent into lawlessness, where state institutions were weaponized to export ideology instead of serving the people.
Today, history is threatening to repeat itself. Since the war erupted in April 2023, Sudan has been thrown into chaos once again. The return of figures from the old Islamist regime through the door of an illegitimate government led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan marks a dangerous turn. With alliances re-forged between the military command, Islamist hardliners, and remnants of the dissolved National Congress, Sudan risks sliding back into the very patterns that once condemned it to decades of isolation.
The international response has already begun. On June 26, the United States activated a first round of sanctions, targeting the Sudanese Armed Forces under the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control Act. This move sends a clear message: the use of banned weapons and continued obstruction of accountability will not go unanswered. More restrictions are likely, including blocking international financing, halting loans from the IMF and World Bank, and possibly downgrading or even closing diplomatic missions. Some observers warn that direct military strikes cannot be ruled out should evidence of chemical weapons use be confirmed.
For ordinary Sudanese, however, the weight of these sanctions will be crushing. With more than 70% of hospitals out of service, mass displacement, and economic collapse already strangling livelihoods, the new restrictions risk turning daily life into survival under siege. Instead of accountability and reform, the regime appears intent on clinging to power by leaning on Islamist networks and deepening ties with international actors such as Iran, Russia, and China.
This cycle mirrors the past: repression at home, reckless alliances abroad, and the steady erosion of Sudan’s sovereignty. It is a path that isolates Sudan further, drains what remains of its institutions, and pushes the country toward becoming a failed state.
The future of Sudan does not lie in recycled leaders or ideological militias. It lies in rebuilding a civilian, democratic state with credible governance and a unifying national project. Without that, Sudan risks descending once more into the abyss—this time with fewer chances for recovery and a heavier burden on its people.
For Sudan, the question remains urgent and unavoidable: will the country break free from the ghosts of its past, or will it sink deeper into isolation, sanctions, and endless conflict?
