U.S. moves to secure humanitarian truce as Sudan War worsens

The United States is preparing to convene an international conference on Sudan in the coming weeks, as Washington seeks to address a worsening humanitarian crisis while opening a potential diplomatic path toward a humanitarian truce and a ceasefire.

Massad Boulos, the U.S. president’s adviser for Arab and African affairs, has stepped up meetings with regional and international stakeholders involved in the Sudan file, particularly partners in the so-called international Quartet, which includes the United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt. The talks have focused on ensuring broad participation in the anticipated conference.

Washington sees the conference as more than a fundraising platform. It is intended to serve as a political pressure framework, raising the issue of safe humanitarian access and the need to halt fighting as core conditions for the effectiveness of any financial support. U.S. officials argue that continued military operations by both the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces undermine relief efforts and reduce aid to short-term fixes that do not address the root causes of the crisis.

According to proposals discussed in Boulos’s recent meetings, the United States and its partners are exploring ways to link the conference’s outcomes to a time-bound humanitarian truce that would allow the opening of safe corridors and enable international organizations to operate on the ground. The truce is being framed as an initial step rather than a final settlement, potentially laying the groundwork for a broader political process if compliance guarantees can be secured.

Diplomats caution, however, that the approach faces major obstacles, including deep mistrust between the warring parties, differing views over the terms of any truce, and the complexity of regional dynamics and external interests. Previous ceasefire attempts that collapsed quickly have underscored the difficulty of achieving a sustainable halt to fighting without effective monitoring mechanisms and international guarantees.

Despite these challenges, the conference could offer a rare moment of leverage if Washington succeeds in tying humanitarian assistance to concrete steps on the ground. Boulos’s outreach is seen as an effort to return Sudan to the international agenda, not only as a humanitarian emergency but as a political and security crisis requiring a comprehensive response beyond emergency relief.

As consultations continue over the timing and final agenda of the conference, U.S. officials are betting it could become a new starting point, combining financial support with diplomatic pressure, that may open a narrow window for a humanitarian truce and, eventually, a broader ceasefire.

Sudan has seen several international humanitarian conferences in recent years, most notably in Geneva and Paris, aimed at mobilizing financial and political support to address the country’s overlapping crises. The Geneva conferences, held multiple times under U.N. and international auspices, focused largely on fundraising for aid agencies and facilitating humanitarian access while avoiding direct political engagement. Although they secured substantial pledges, their impact on the ground remained limited due to continued fighting, access constraints and the lack of mechanisms to ensure that funds reached beneficiaries in a sustained manner.

The Sudanese government’s stance toward such conferences has been mixed. While it has welcomed them in principle as a source of humanitarian support, it has repeatedly objected to what it describes as the politicization of aid or violations of national sovereignty. Officials have stressed that assistance should be delivered through official channels and rejected tying aid to political or security conditions they do not endorse, a position that has fueled tensions with some international actors and complicated efforts to translate conference pledges into tangible outcomes on the ground.