What Makes Conflict Sustainable? A Look into Prolonged Violence and the Case of Sudan
Conflict sustainability might sound contradictory, as it refers to factors that enable violence and unrest to endure rather than fade. When we consider why certain conflicts persist for years or even decades, such as in Sudan, we begin to see a web of complex internal and external factors. Both dynamics play crucial roles, often feeding into one another and making resolution challenging. But what really makes conflict “sustainable,” and what elements keep the cycle of violence alive?
1. Internal and External Factors: Which Matters More?
To understand why some conflicts last longer, we must examine both internal and external factors. While each conflict is unique, common threads sustain violence over long periods, and these can originate both within and outside a country’s borders.
- Internal Factors: Internal factors often include governance issues, social divisions, and economic inequalities. In Sudan, for instance, long-standing grievances between ethnic groups, political factions, and regional communities have fueled a sense of exclusion and resentment. When communities feel marginalized or unfairly treated by the central government, this dissatisfaction can build, igniting calls for change or independence that are hard to extinguish.
- External Factors: External dynamics often reinforce or exacerbate internal issues. In Sudan’s case, the involvement of neighboring countries and global powers has historically played a significant role. Foreign countries may intervene by supplying arms, funding certain factions, or backing one side politically to gain influence or access to resources. When external interests align with internal grievances, the conflict gains external support that prolongs violence. For example, Sudan’s strategic location and its abundant natural resources make it attractive to foreign powers and corporations with vested interests, leading to further entrenchment of conflict dynamics.
2. Why Does Violence Last for Longer?
Conflicts that endure typically involve a mix of ideological and financial motivations that fuel continued fighting as well as external support. Here are some of the primary elements that contribute to prolonged violence:
- Economic Incentives: Conflicts can become “profitable” for certain groups, both locally and internationally. In Sudan, various factions, militias, and leaders may have vested interests in controlling valuable resources such as oil, minerals, or even humanitarian aid supplies. This economic interest creates a scenario where the conflict itself becomes a livelihood, sustaining violence as a means of maintaining control over profitable assets.
- Weak Governance and Political Instability: Weak or failing governments are often unable to effectively manage the unrest or reach a lasting peace. In Sudan, internal power struggles and governance weaknesses have plagued the country for decades, leaving power vacuums that local and regional groups are eager to fill. When governance is fragmented, it creates space for armed groups to establish dominance, furthering conflict and delaying resolution.
- Lack of Trust and Deep Social Divides: In conflicts like Sudan’s, social and ethnic divides deepen mistrust, making peace negotiations challenging. When groups don’t trust one another, each ceasefire or agreement is seen as a temporary pause rather than a commitment to peace. This lack of trust creates an environment where any perceived betrayal or slight can quickly reignite hostilities, perpetuating the cycle of violence.
- Influence of Regional and Global Powers: Conflicts with regional and global interest often last longer. Neighboring countries might support certain factions to strengthen their influence. This can involve providing financial support, weaponry, or even diplomatic backing. In Sudan, both regional neighbors and global powers have exerted influence, with each having its own stake in the country’s resources or political alignment. This creates a tug-of-war that makes the internal dynamics of Sudan’s conflict even more complex and entrenched.
3. Impact on Sudan and the Sustainability of Conflict
In Sudan, these factors have coalesced to create a setting where violence not only sustains itself but, at times, even escalates. For example, local populations often become pawns in the larger game of power and resource control, suffering the greatest impact without any say in the outcome.
- Humanitarian Crisis: Prolonged conflict creates a vicious cycle of displacement, hunger, and lack of basic services. In Sudan, ongoing violence has displaced millions, making it difficult for families to establish stability and for children to access education. The humanitarian toll only adds to the grievances that sustain the conflict, as new generations grow up in a cycle of hardship and violence.
- Impact on Development and Governance: Sustainable conflict prevents Sudan from developing economically or politically. Investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare are sidelined as resources are instead funneled toward military and defense needs. This lack of development perpetuates poverty and inequality, which in turn fuels the conflict, creating a self-perpetuating cycle that’s difficult to break.
- Economic Loss and Resource Exploitation: The conflict in Sudan has kept the country from fully exploiting its resources for national growth, as various factions and external actors gain control over valuable commodities. These resources become both a prize and a curse, as the struggle to control them sustains the violence. Instead of benefiting the people, resources such as oil and gold are often used to finance militias or to pay off foreign supporters, further embedding the conflict’s sustainability.
Breaking the Cycle: Toward Sustainable Peace
To disrupt the factors sustaining conflict, both internal reforms and international cooperation are necessary. For Sudan, this would require addressing long-standing grievances within the country, creating inclusive governance systems, and establishing fair resource distribution. International actors, for their part, would need to respect Sudan’s sovereignty and support peacebuilding efforts rather than fueling divisive conflicts. Peace agreements that involve all major stakeholders and consider both internal dynamics and external interests would be a significant step toward dismantling the sustainability of conflict in Sudan.
