Sudan’s RRF Leader Demands Army Withdrawal Before Talks

Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hamidti, who leads Sudan’s rapid reaction forces, also called the RRF, the country’s elite special operations unit, has stated that there will be no talks with the military until a withdrawal of army units from key areas occurs. This stance was attributed to Al Arabiya in recent coverage that emphasized the hard line from the RRF leadership. Dagalo underscored that dialogue could not proceed while the army remained within the zones they claim to control or while the military apparatus continued what the RRF describes as unlawful actions. The rhetoric signals a clear demand for a measurable redeployment of forces before any political negotiation can take place. In recent days, the RRF has repeatedly voiced concerns over the chain of command and the legality of actions taken by regular army units, seeking to position the rapid response forces as the primary interlocutor for any future settlement. The exchange reflects a broader pattern in Sudan where security agencies and paramilitary groups assert borderlines around engagement, insisting on conditions before any formal talks can begin and warning that unrest or escalations must be halted first to pave a route toward governance through nonviolent means. In this context, Dagalo and his allies are signaling a potential reconfiguration of who has formal authority during an eventual political transition, a topic that has drawn close scrutiny from regional actors and international observers who closely monitor the Sudanese crisis for signs of steps toward stability. This stance by the RRF complements earlier statements that framed the army’s willingness to negotiate as conditional upon a cessation of what they termed “lawlessness,” suggesting a mutual expectation that disciplined redeployment and accountability measures would precede any mediation. The emphasis on withdrawal from contested urban and strategic spaces highlights the fragile balance of power that has persisted since the latest flare-ups, with both sides warning of consequences if talks were forced while troops remained in position. The public posture of the RRF adds another layer to a complex security landscape in western Sudan and surrounding regions, where control of critical infrastructure and air bases often becomes a bargaining chip in high-stakes political maneuvering. Observers point to the potential repercussions for civilians and regional stability should negotiations stall or degrade into renewed clashes. While the official channels for dialogue remain uncertain, the insistence on withdrawal before negotiation indicates a strategic attempt by the RRF to consolidate leverage and ensure any later agreements are framed within a clear, enforceable security environment. Independent analysts and local communities are watching closely for signs of a return to dialogue, a de-escalation of unit movements, and a credible plan for humanitarian protection and civilian safety. In coverage by Al Arabiya and other outlets, the overall trend suggests that while there may be international calls for inclusive talks and quick resolution, the on-the-ground dynamics continue to be shaped by rapid force deployments, questions of legitimacy, and the strategic use of proximity to critical facilities to influence any future political settlement. The situation remains fluid as both sides maintain a posture of readiness, while regional powers consider options to encourage restraint and a negotiated path forward, aiming to prevent a broader humanitarian crisis and to support a stable trajectory for Sudan’s governance and security mechanisms.