Parallel governments, like those in Libya, Somalia and Angola, exacerbate humanitarian crises, prolong wars, and foster extremism. In Sudan, RSF and aligned groups risk replicating this failure, undermining efforts to unify the country and end its war. History teaches that such entities destabilise states rather than bring stability.
The term parallel government refers to “the situation when non-state actors or movements claim to function as a state in competing with the authority and sometimes replacing it”. In Sudan, as the sudden eruption of war nears its second anniversary, the threat of a parallel government looms, threatening its unity.
Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group accused of crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, have signed a charter with allied armed groups and political entities to establish a parallel government. On March 11, the African Union’s Peace and Security Council (PSC) condemned this step, seeing it as a sign that could lead the country to division. Despite claiming its aims for Sudan’s unification, ending its war and challenging the authority of the Port-Sudan administration, the RSF’s actions are deepening the crisis.
Parallel governments, as seen worldwide, often undermine the peace efforts, exacerbate crises, and result in a fragile, weakened state. For Sudan, this moves risks prolonging the war rather than ending it.
Parallel governments in Africa:
In Angola, where a civil war lasted from 1975 to 2002, fuelled by deep division, resulting in creating of two parallel governments, UNITA (National Union for the Total Independence of Angola) established its own administration in Jamba, directly challenging the ruling party MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola). UNITA set up a de facto government, complete with a demonetised economy, providing essential services such as healthcare and food. UNITA’s fought to gain legitimacy, control its territory, and compete with the central government.
However, this step prolonged the civil war, worsened the humanitarian crisis, and left Angola weaker than ever. It wasn’t until 2002, when the country finally reunited, and could starting to rebuild again.
Libya faced a split after Gaddafi’s downfall leading to two rival governments: one in Tripoli backed by the UN and Western nations, and another in the east. This split weakened Libya’s unity leaving a power gap that armed groups filled. As a result, Libya and the surrounding area landed in a tough spot.
Similarly, in Somalia, Al-Shabab, a group labeled as terrorists, controls many areas. It operates its own military branches such including healthcare, infantry, and communications. Al-Shabab spreads chaos inside and beyond Somalia, by targeting the Somali National Army (SNA) and government officials, conducting killings, ambushes, and bombings. Like other non-state groups, it funds its terror campaigns by running key sectors of the economy, imposing taxes on people and businesses, and extorting money from individuals and organizations. The group also has a history of human rights abuses including sexual violence, limiting women’s and girls’ rights, and use of child soldiers. This has led Somalia into ongoing chaos and stability.
In 2015 Islamic State In Iraq and Syria (ISIS) took large swathes of Syria, setting up a self-proclaimed state with ministries, police forces and public services . It was financed through oil revenues, smuggling, and taxation. This de-facto government disrupted Syria and committed heinous acts of genocide. In a similar vein, Sri Lanka Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) created in 1976 a parallel government contested by the central government and succeeded in acquiring air forces, artillery, and advanced military capabilities which complicated the scenario, and perpetuated the conflict until 2009. The conflict crippled economic development, triggered waves of refugees, and led to widespread suffering.
History shows us that forming a parallel government fuels conflict, worsens humanitarian crisis, and ultimately led to a fragile or failed state. such systems create fertile ground for extremism and terrorism, hindering national unity and deepening division. Cases such as Somalia and ISIS demonstrate how non-actor groups deepen humanitarian crises, attract international extremists, and obstruct aid delivery.
According to the UNHCR, Sudan is facing one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, with over three million Sudanese having fled to neighbouring countries. The number of internally displaced people exceeds the entire population of Switzerland, people in conflict zones face extreme dangers, indiscriminate killing, assassination and sexual violence against women and girls. Given these realities, this crisis is likely to worsen with a formation of a parallel government. These cases demonstrate the parallel governments’ worsening inter-communal conflicts and exacerbate the humanitarian crisis.
Additionally, the inclusion of self-determination in the charter that was signed on February 20, increases risks. If the charter’s provisions are not implemented, the risk of fragmentation poses a serious threat to Sudan’s stability, and could trap its people in prolonged suffering.
Finally, the cases of Sri Lanka and Angola demonstrate that parallel governments undermine the state stability, prolong the inter-communal conflicts, and worsen crises, notably when de facto states acquire military capabilities that compete with those of the central governments.
To avoid the spectre of fragmentation:
A few key steps could help to eliminate the threat of the segmentation in Sudan including.
- Achieving peace and transitional justices by including all the stakeholders to address the root causes of the conflict.
- Ensuring that past atrocities are addressed through justice and holding perpetrators accountability to move toward unity.
- Providing compensation to victims is necessary to rebuild trust and foster reconciliation.
- Engagement of International and regional partners should rally behind Sudan to overcoming its challenges and support its steps towards unity and prosperity.
- Strengthen education system and public awareness is vital to end illiteracy and support democratic choices
- Empowering civil society, safeguard media freedom, and reform the judiciary and security sectors are essential for justice, safety and democratic transition in Sudan.
The rise of parallel governments, where non-state actors assume state-like functions in opposition to central authority, poses a serious threat to Sudan’s stability as war nears its second anniversary. The Rapid Support Forces (RSF), despite claims of unification, have deepened Sudan’s crisis by forming a de facto government with other groups, drawing condemnation from the African Union. Historical parallels from Angola, Libya, Somalia, Sri Lanka, and Syria show that such setups often prolong conflicts, worsen humanitarian conditions, and erode state institutions. Sudan is already experiencing one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, with millions displaced and communities facing violence and instability. The inclusion of self-determination in RSF’s charter further raises the risk of national fragmentation. To avert deeper division, Sudan must pursue inclusive peace, justice, and reconciliation, supported by international partners and strengthened civil institutions.
The Writer, Gihad Makin is a graduate of International Relations from Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia with a passion for peace, democracy, and geopolitics, focusing especially on Sudan and global affairs. Gihad is deeply interested in understanding the political and security challenges shaping our world and in contributing to conversations around social justice and stability.
