In October 2017, the United States lifted a wide range of economic sanctions that had been in place against Sudan for two decades. Aly Verjee, a visiting expert at the United States Institute of Peace, recently interviewed roughly 50 Sudanese—including students, business owners, doctors, laborers, activists, and others outside the government-connected elite—on what this first step in the normalization of relations between Sudan and the United States might mean for the future of their country.

June 5 event — Sudan after the Sanctions

Summary

  • Twenty years of comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions on Sudan were permanently revoked in October 2017, after the U.S. government deemed Sudan to have made progress in five key areas. The United States continues to designate Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism, preventing a broader normalization of relations.
  • While the lifting of sanctions was welcomed by most Sudanese interviewed for this report, the deteriorating economy, government repression, and failure to resolve Sudan’s multiple conflicts have overshadowed the U.S. overture.
  • Furthermore, Sudan’s economic crisis has led to skepticism about the effectiveness of sanctions relief. Most interviewees feel the process that led to the lifting of sanctions lacked transparency and did not sufficiently involve or inform Sudanese outside the government-connected elite.
  • Many respondents feel disappointed by the limited U.S. action in response to recent government repression and lack confidence that the United States will hold Sudanese authorities accountable for violations of human rights and the rule of law, maintaining presidential term limits in the constitution, and holding credible elections in 2020.
  • Given the US interest in counterterrorism and countering violent extremism, some respondents believe the government of Sudan exaggerates its knowledge of terrorist activities as a means of proving its usefulness to the United States.
  • Overall, Sudanese perceptions of the goals of the United States in its relations with Sudan diverge from the intentions expressed by the US government. This indicates a significant communications and public diplomacy deficit, which detracts from U.S. objectives and limits the ability of Sudanese citizens to hold their own government to account.

About the Report

Drawing on fieldwork and interviews conducted in January and February 2018, a few months after U.S. economic sanctions on Sudan were permanently lifted, this report examines the perceptions and hopes of Sudanese citizens for future relations between Sudan and the United States. Research for this report was supported by the Middle East and Africa Center at the United States Institute of Peace.

About the Author

Aly Verjee is a visiting expert at the United States Institute of Peace and a fellow of the Rift Valley Institute. He lived in Sudan from 2005 to 2011 and is the author of several publications, including “New North, Old North: The Republic of Sudan after the Split,” a chapter in Sudan after Separation: New Approaches to a New Region, published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation (2012).

Related Publications

Reforming the U.S.-Sudan Relationship Requires a Regional Strategy

Reforming the U.S.-Sudan Relationship Requires a Regional Strategy

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

By: Aly Verjee; Payton Knopf

On November 7, the U.S. Department of State announced long-awaited plans outlining a path to better relations with Sudan, “designed to expand our bilateral cooperation, facilitate meaningful reforms to enhance stability in Sudan, and achieve further progress in a number of areas of longstanding concern.” USIP’s Aly Verjee and Payton Knopf discuss the initiative, and identify where broader U.S. regional objectives could cohere, including in the war in Yemen.

Fragility & Resilience; Global Policy

Why the U.S. Needs a Special Envoy for the Red Sea

Why the U.S. Needs a Special Envoy for the Red Sea

Tuesday, October 23, 2018

By: Payton Knopf

The Trump administration has appointed four special envoys to coordinate U.S. policy toward key hot spots: Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Afghanistan. Yet in the Red Sea—one of the most volatile and lethal regions of the world afflicted by several interconnected conflicts and rivalries that pose significant challenges to American interests—U.S. policy has been rudderless in large part due to the absence of a similar post.

Global Policy; Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Q&A: Sudan, South Sudan Wars--Special Envoy Needed?

Q&A: Sudan, South Sudan Wars--Special Envoy Needed?

Thursday, September 14, 2017

As the war in South Sudan rages on, its dynamics are influenced by events across the border in Sudan and by the policies of neighboring countries, regional groups and the broader international community, notably the U.S. It’s just the kind of situation that cries out for an American diplomat with the stature and the ability to work across borders to help resolve the myriad conflicts underlying the fighting, according to former Special Envoy to Sudan and South Sudan Princeton Lyman and two other former diplomats.

Global Policy; Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

View All Publications