#KeepEyesOnSudan
The clownish speech delivered yesterday by Musad Boulos
@US_SrAdvisorAF at the UN Security Council on Sudan is the clearest proof of how deeply compromised the political forces that feign false neutrality truly are—forces that in reality recycle the Rapid Support Forces’ narratives to prolong the war. Boulos adopted a hollow rhetoric of nominal equality between Sudan’s warring sides, a discourse relentlessly pushed by alliances like the Civil Front, then “Taqaddum,” then “Sumood”—even as large parts of these coalitions openly defected to join the militia, while their Emirati patron continues to bankroll anyone serving its agenda.
Boulos’s speech, detached from reality, trafficked in half-truths—a habit of his, repeating to every audience exactly what they want to hear. The reality is clear: no side in any war is 100% innocent. But the compass that points to the aggressor and criminal is always unmistakable. Today, the Sudanese army is fighting a just war—defending our people, our land, and our state. It is a terrible war, as all wars are, but it was forced upon us: defending tens of thousands besieged for 18 months in El Fasher before being massacred by the RSF; defending the 460 patients and medical staff slaughtered in the Saudi Hospital the moment the militia seized it; defending millions in Khartoum and Gezira, robbed, displaced, and violated by RSF until the army liberated their neighborhoods; defending hundreds of thousands in Dilling, Obeid, and Kadugli, who welcomed the army as it broke their siege. None of these realities matter to Boulos, but they speak for themselves: equating Sudan’s national army with the Emirati-backed fascist militia is a lie crafted by those exploiting Sudan’s suffering for their own agendas.
Of course, I will not burden Musad Boulos with Rousseau’s writings on the “social order,” which thrives in peace but inevitably bends under the necessities of survival in war—concepts perhaps too demanding for the used-car dealer background he carries. His speech on Sudan was not the logic of a state seeking stability through law and accountability, but the logic of a trader brokering deals between market actors for profit.
As for the Muslim Brotherhood bogeyman that Boulos waves to please the Emirati sponsors and echo their narrative—we are the ones who overthrew them. The Sudanese people and their living forces, who resisted dictatorship and authoritarianism inside Sudan against Bashir’s henchmen and militias, are the ones who will write the future of democratic transition. We are not waiting for Boulos to define it for us. He cannot, and he never will. Sudanese today are united against the greater evil embodied by the RSF and the Emirati colonial project—save for a handful of Shakhbout’s clients whispering in Boulos’s ear through the handler seated behind him.
Boulos, who lectures us about peace in Sudan, should first understand: peace will not come through commercial brokerage, but through national policies that safeguard the state and serve its citizens.
Sudan will always have a national army, as long as Sudan exists—regardless of political leadership. But the RSF will not endure. Its survival would mean Sudan’s annihilation, a fate we will never allow you to push us toward.
Mr. Boulos: thank you for your efforts. After being sidelined from the Congo file and passed over on Gaza, perhaps you should turn your attention to gold and mineral deals—far away from our country.