Qatar vs. Egypt in Sudan

On Sunday it was announced that Qatar is donating approximately $13.7 million dollars worth of humanitarian aid to Sudan’s conflict-plagued Darfur region. This has come after a flurry of Qatari economic activity in Sudan. Most notable is the Al Difaf project, situated on the banks of the Nile River, a prime location in Khartoum. The project stretches over 200,000 square metres and will comprise of offices, residential and retail units in addition to a five-star hotel. Nasser Hassan Al-Ansar, CEO of the Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment Company that is in charge of the project, recently addressed an audience pronouncing that the “Sudanese are our brothers and we are not strangers here. We are feeling perfectly at home here”. Indeed, Qatar is clearly “at home” in Sudan. In an economic environment that many Western governments find inhospitable, it is conservatively estimated that Qatar has pledged to invest billions of dollars in Sudan. Of comparable significance is Sudan’s role as mediator between the Darfuri rebels and the Khartoum government, traditionally regarded as Egypt’s prerogative in part due to its geographical proximity. So why does Qatar have a role in Sudan? Firstly, it must be noted that this development has happened with the blessing of the United States which views Egypt as too involved in Sudanese politics to act as an “honest broker”. For Qatar, such mediation offers a mean gaining prestige and recognition as a major player in Middle Eastern and international diplomacy (only last month, Qatar was accepted as a mediator in the border conflict between Eritrea and Djibouti).

However, Egypt has not relinquished its role as the mediator in Sudan without a fight. Angry editorials in Al-Gomhouriyya have accused Qatar of bribing the rebels to participate in negotiations. Likewise, the Qatari media have vehemently retaliated by ignoring any Egyptian-led breakthroughs. Qatar-based Sudanese Al-Raya columnist Hamed Ibrahim Hamid openly stated that Egypt’s motives for interfering Sudan were dubious: “A question arises that the Sudanese must answer before the Egyptians, namely, what Egypt seek in Darfur? Does it really wish to resolve the crisis through their latest initiatives, whose object, it contends, is to unite Darfuri armed movements? Both of these articles hint at positions articulated at the highest levels in both the Qatari and Egyptian political elites. Yet such polemic is unhelpful in the actual settlement of the Sudanese crisis. Egypt’s role as Sudan’s patron is inescapable and therefore must be respected. Nevertheless, precisely as a result of this Egypt is compromised. Therefore, the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council and the United Nations must persuade Egypt to, at the very least, remain silent whilst Qatar attempts to negotiate between the rebels and the Khartoum-based government in Sudan. Not do so endangers the tentative peace agreements that are already in place. If the participants in the Sudanese conflict are given mixed signals by the Egyptians even the referendum on Southern Sudan’s independence expected in 2011 could be endangered.