Sudan’s War Is Also an Islamist Power Struggle, Activist Warns

Three years after Sudan’s military ruler, Abdel Fattah Al Burhan, removed his deputy and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as "Hemedti", the rivalry between the two men has plunged the country into a devastating civil war fought over territory, power, and ideology.

The dispute initially centered on who would control Sudan, how quickly the RSF would be integrated into the regular army, and who would command that unified force. But as the conflict deepened, ideological divisions sharpened alongside the battlefield lines.

The RSF has sought to portray itself as an anti-Islamist force distancing Sudan from the radicalism associated with former president Omar Al Bashir. The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), by contrast, have increasingly absorbed Islamist loyalists and allegedly foreign fighters with extremist ideologies into their ranks.

For Dr. Alaaeldin Awad Nogoud, a prominent Sudanese surgeon and activist who has long campaigned against political Islam in Sudan, the growing influence of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) over the state is nothing new.

“Since Sudan’s independence in 1956, this organization has been working in a manner to overcome any democratic transitions,” Nogoud says.

He points to the 1989 coup that brought Omar Al Bashir to power as the turning point. According to Nogoud, the Muslim Brotherhood steadily infiltrated nearly every sector of Sudanese society, from government institutions and civil organizations to trade unions and the military itself.

“It came to a point where the highest-ranked officers in the army belonged to the MB,” he says. “Those who are not affiliated with them have zero chance to get promoted or be responsible for something substantial in the military.”

Nogoud argues that Islamist influence extends far beyond the formal armed forces. Multiple reports suggest that Brotherhood-linked networks maintain ties to militias fighting alongside SAF, including Popular Resistance Committees, remnants of Bashir-era Popular Defense Forces, and the Al Bara Ibn Malik battalion.

“There are roughly twelve militias within SAF that are linked to the MB,” Nogoud claims. “So not only do the Muslim Brothers control the official weapons of the country, including chemicals and drones, they also hold the non-official weapons—the jihadist militias—in their hands. That is, of course, a serious problem.”

Both the SAF and the RSF have been accused of unlawful killings, torture, and attacks on civilians throughout the conflict. But Nogoud says SAF-aligned forces have shown particular brutality, accusing them of indiscriminate shelling, aerial bombardment of densely populated residential areas, and the use of chemical weapons.

Nogoud says he experienced that brutality firsthand. 

In May 2023, he was detained by the army on accusations of undermining SAF. He says his belongings were confiscated, and he was beaten, tortured, and forced to kneel for hours under the scorching sun, leaving scars that have still not healed.

“I am a known surgeon who operated on more than 250 people during the 2018 revolution, and my detention stirred a wide national and international campaign for my release,” he recalls. “In the end, they let me go after failing to link me to any parts of the conflict.”

For Nogoud, the violence reflects a broader political project: restoring the Islamist order that dominated Sudan under Bashir.

“They want to come back to power and restore what they had during the era of Al Bashir,” he says.

Nogoud also argues that Sudan’s Islamists continue to benefit from backing by powerful regional actors. Turkey and Saudi Arabia, he says, maintain strong pro-Islamist currents within parts of their establishments. Egypt, despite designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization domestically, has also supported Islamist-linked elements in Sudan while resisting democratic transition efforts, he claims.

“We often joke that in 1956 Sudan didn’t get complete independence,” Nogoud says. “The British went out, but the Egyptians remained, and they have been the ones controlling Sudan’s political, military, and social decisions.”

Some governments, however, did take active actions against the MB of Sudan and their control over the country. In March, the US State Department designated the Brotherhood of Sudan as a terror organization, and in May, Emirati authorities referred 13 defendants and six UAE-registered companies to the State Security Court over an alleged Muslim Brotherhood-linked network accused of smuggling weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition to SAF.

Yet, such moves remain rare globally, and Nogoud warns that the consequences of inaction on that front could wreak havoc worldwide.

“Sudan has become a nucleus for terrorists, with extremists coming from Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad,” he argues. “So if the Muslim Brotherhood continues to play a central part in the military and politics, there will be no future for Sudan.”

Neither will there be a future for Europe and the US, he emphasized, saying, “The spread of extremism in Africa will create an idea that terror has no borders and can be exported to the whole world, including Europe and the US. This is why it must be stopped.”