Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Sudan on November 18 as the country continues to grapple with a deadly war that has displaced millions of people and spurred a desperate humanitarian crisis.

The resolution, authored by the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, called on Sudan’s warring factions—the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)—to agree to a national ceasefire, facilitate humanitarian aid, and ensure the safe passage of civilians.

The draft resolution called on the parties to the conflict to “immediately cease hostilities and engage, in good faith, in dialogue to agree steps to de-escalate the conflict with the aim of urgently agreeing a national ceasefire.”

It also called on the parties to honour the Jeddah declaration, engage in dialogue to agree to humanitarian pauses and to ensure the safe passage of civilians and the delivery of adequate humanitarian aid, among other measures.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that at least 20,000 people have been killed since April 2023, while some reports suggest as many as 150,000 fatalities due to the conflict. Some 26mn Sudanese face crisis-level food insecurity.

Russia has maintained close relations with Sudan since Soviet times and remains a major weapons supplier to the country. The Kremlin also has its eye on the port of Sudan, which would give it a strategically important naval base on the Red Sea watching over the transit of cargo through the Suez Canal that accounts for about 40% of the global goods traffic.

The conflict, which erupted in April between SAF and RSF, has created the world’s largest displacement crisis, UN officials report. Russia was the only member of the 15-member council to vote against the measure.

“Russia’s decision to veto this resolution is mean, nasty and cynical,” said British Foreign Secretary David Lammy following the vote. “One country stood in the way of the council speaking with one voice. How many more Sudanese have to be killed, how many more women have to be raped, how many more children have to go without food before Russia will act?” Al Jazeera reports.

The Russian veto also drew sharp criticism from other Security Council members. US ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield called it “unconscionable,” adding, “It is shocking that Russia has vetoed an effort to save lives—though perhaps, it shouldn’t be. They claim it is because of Sudanese sovereignty. But Sudan supports the resolution,” Al Jazeera reports.

But the Sudanese Foreign Ministry praised Russia for what it called upholding Sudan’s sovereignty and independence, viewing the veto as a move to prevent international overreach in the Security Council. Sudan's ambassador to the UN, Al-Harith Idris, criticised the resolution for equating the Sudanese government with the RSF, calling the latter rebel militias. He accused countries, including the UAE, of supplying weapons to the RSF and urged the Security Council to support Sudan’s national civilian protection plan.

Previously, in March 2024, the Security Council adopted Resolution 2724, calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities during Ramadan, which the US supported.

Despite backing the resolution, the US has made enemies in Sudan. It imposed several rounds of sanctions on Sudan over the years, targeting individuals and entities involved in human rights abuses and actions undermining peace and stability. In May 2023, US President Joe Biden issued an executive order authorising sanctions against those destabilising Sudan and obstructing its democratic transition. Subsequently, in June 2023, the US Department of the Treasury sanctioned four companies linked to the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) for their roles in perpetuating the conflict.

In an address to the council after the vote, Russia’s deputy ambassador to the UN Dmitry Polyanskiy said Moscow agreed “that the conflict in Sudan requires a swift resolution” and that “the only way to achieve this is for the warring parties to agree to a ceasefire”.

But he went on to accuse the UK and Sierra Leone of “double standards”, pointing to Britain’s support of Israel’s ongoing humanitarian violations in its war in Gaza. He said Lammy’s criticism of the Russian veto was an “excellent demonstration of British neo-colonialism”.

Polyanskiy said while the UNSC’s role is to help the warring parties achieve that, it “should not be done by imposing upon the Sudanese, through a council decision, the opinion of its individual members”.

Russian interests in Sudan

The Russian veto is part of the Kremlin’s strategy to expand and deepen its strategic ties in Africa and to block Western action and influence on the continent.

More generally, the Kremlin is increasingly following the principle of “non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states,” as Russian President Vladimir Putin recently outlined in his statement of Russia’s world view in his Valdai speech. These sentiments are echoed in Chinese President Xi Jinping’s preference for a multipolar war which he described to Biden at a meeting in Lima at the weekend. However, China voted to approve the ceasefire resolution on November 18.

Russia’s first noticeably cited the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states during a UN debate on providing military assistance to the rebels fighting against the Libya dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.

Initially, wanted to veto the decision, but under international pressure it eventually abstained from the vote allowing UN allies to impose the agreed no-fly zone over the country. However, the Nato forces quickly overstepped their mandate and actively supported insurgents bring about the fall of Gaddafi.

Russia complained bitterly about what it deemed was an abuse of its acquiesces, fuelling its mistrust of Nato, and has taken a harder line on non-interference ever since. For his part, former President Barak Obama admitted the Libyan campaign ended in as a "mess," acknowledging that there was no effective follow-up to stabilise the country after the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi.

There are only three ways to legally send troops to another country: in response to an attack by an aggressor, as was the case with Ukraine’s Kursk incursion; at the invitation by the country’s government, as was the case with Russia’s military presence in Syria; and with a UN mandate, as was the case with Nato’s military action in Libya. 

The last thing that Russia wants to do it open the door to a UN-mandated Nato peacekeeping force arriving on Sudanese soil. As a result, Russia’s veto of the resolution was a foregone conclusion.

War erupted between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in April 2023, displacing more than 11mn people, including 3.1mn who have fled the country, the UN has reported.

Sudan holds strategic importance for Russia due to its geographical location and natural resources. Russia long-standing military ties with Sudan since Soviet times that continue today.

It also plans to establish a naval base on the Red Sea, which would enhance its naval presence and give it key control over the traffic passing through the Suez canal. A Russian base in the Red Sea would further facilitate the deployment of Russian vessels in the Indian Ocean, a region reflecting growing geopolitical competition where Moscow has several partners, including Iran, India, and South Africa.

Additionally, Russian entities have been involved in Sudan's mining sector, particularly in gold extraction, providing economic benefits and strengthening bilateral ties.

Russia views its partnerships with African countries as geopolitical leverage and Putin’s anti-colonial message has been well received by many African nations. Russia has hosted two African-Russian summits which most of the prominent African leaders attended and the Kremlin is far ahead of the West in deepening ties with the 54 African nations.

Russia's relationship with Sudan dates back to the Cold War. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia’s engagement with Sudan experienced a lull but began to pick up again in the 2000s, with Sudan seen as an important ally to counterbalance Western influence in Africa.

The Kremlin continued to provide military assistance and support to the previous leader of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, who ruled the country from 1989 to 2019 when he was overthrown.

Since then, the Kremlin has maintained relations with the two rival forces that are fighting for control of the country: the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). By vetoing the ceasefire resolution, Russia may be seeking to preserve its influence with both factions, ensuring that it remains a key player in any future political settlement.

The SAF is the successor to al-Bashir’s military force and continues to do business with Russia. But at the same time Russia’s PMC (private military company) Wagner has had business with the RSF, providing it with training and military support in exchange for gold mining concessions.

In the United Nations General Assembly votes to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Sudan chose to abstain from the resolutions. Sudan did not explicitly support Russia, nor did it condemn the invasion; instead, it took a neutral stance, reflecting the complexities of its own foreign relations and regional alliances.