On 26 February, U.S. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken announced the appointment of Tom Perriello as U.S. Special Envoy for Sudan to coordinate the U.S. policy on Sudan and advance efforts to end the hostilities, secure unhindered humanitarian access, and support the Sudanese people as they seek to fulfill their aspirations for freedom, peace, and justice.
According to Blinken, the special envoy will also work to empower Sudanese civilian leaders and drive the U.S’ engagement with partners in Africa, the Middle East, and the international community to forge a united approach to stop the senseless conflict, prevent further atrocities, and promote accountability for crimes already committed during the ongoing war between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
Special Envoy Perriello is on a tour of the East African region and told Radio Tamazuj during an exclusive interview that neither protagonist can win the war and the only path to peace is an inclusive dialogue by the Sudanese people.
He shares his insights on the crisis in Sudan, his background, and the U.S. government’s efforts to support peace and humanitarian access in the region.
Special Envoy Perriello also discusses the ongoing challenges and the urgent need for international cooperation to end the conflict and address the unraveling humanitarian crisis.
Below are edited excerpts:
Question: Can you tell us more about yourself? Our audience might want to know more about you.
Answer: I am Tom Perriello. I was born and raised in Charles Hill, Virginia, a couple of hours from Washington, D.C. My parents felt they had experienced the American dream. My dad came from Italian immigrants and my mom is Irish. They instilled in me a sense of gratitude for being born in America which motivated me to serve others who have not had the same opportunities.
I often say I started this work out of a sense of guilt, but I stayed for the joy. My career began with justice issues and a turning point for me was working with market women and civil society groups in Sierra Leone during the tenth year of their brutal civil war. The world had given up on Sierra Leone, thinking it would be a perpetual war zone. However, these women were determined to secure a seat at the negotiating table and demand peace.
They succeeded, and I had the privilege of witnessing and contributing to that transformation. Seeing a country overcome its war-torn past and break the cycles of violence and impunity inspired me. My life’s work has been about supporting and empowering people, particularly women and youth, to realize new possibilities in their countries and communities.
Q: Mr. Tom, could you tell us about your recent tour around the region and what makes this trip different from the previous one?
A: When I took this job, President [Joe] Biden and Secretary Blinken made it clear that my mission was to stand with the people of Sudan. To do that effectively, I needed to hear directly from the Sudanese people, especially those who have been marginalized, like women and youth.
On this tour, we met with many Sudanese refugees in Egypt, Nairobi, and Uganda. We also used digital technology to communicate with people inside Sudan, listening to their experiences in places like Khartoum, Omdurman, and Zamzam.
Throughout these conversations, one clear message emerged repeatedly: the urgent need to end the war and ensure that food and medicine reach every corner of Sudan. This is an agenda that unites the Sudanese people, despite efforts to divide them. The call for peace and humanitarian aid is the strongest and most consistent message I hear from the Sudanese people.
Q: Since the war broke out in Sudan, the U.S. was not heavily focused on Sudan. Why is that changing now?
A: From the beginning, the United States has cared about Sudan. The change now is that we have more allies in the region and around the world who recognize the severity of the crisis.
Unfortunately, this increased attention is due to the worsening situation. The conflict now affects not only the people of Sudan but the entire region. We are seeing a spillover of refugees, heightened polarizing rhetoric, and the involvement of ethnic groups with cross-border populations. Additionally, more foreign actors and governments are engaging in the conflict without regard for Sudan’s future.
This crisis has evolved from a Sudanese issue to a regional one. Consequently, more counterparts from Africa, the African Union, the Gulf, and Europe are coming together to demand an end to the war. This unified political alignment is crucial and marks a significant shift from a year ago.
Q: During your recent tour in the region, what did you find that can help end the war in Sudan, especially from the neighboring countries?
A: There is a clear message from across Africa and the Gulf: Neither side is winning this war, and neither side can win. The only path forward is a negotiated settlement that transfers power to a civilian authority. This process must include the establishment of a fully integrated, professional, and accountable military, which is crucial for Sudan. Additionally, the urgent need for food and medicine is universal across SAF-controlled areas, RSF-controlled areas, neutral areas, and refugee camps.
Another significant change is the growing global awareness and concern for Sudan. When I first took this job, many Sudanese had given up hope that the world cared about their plight. However, we are now seeing increased humanitarian aid, more pressure for peace talks, and support for an inclusive political process. While this response has come too late for many, it is creating new energy among civil society and humanitarian actors, making them feel less invisible. We need to continue rebuilding trust, but progress is underway.
Q: In March, you announced peace talks immediately after Ramadan, but they have not taken place. Millions of Sudanese are waiting for an update. When will these negotiations occur, and what will happen?
A: First of all, the Jeddah process is ongoing. We engage with Sudanese civilians calling for peace daily, which is an integral part of Jeddah. Meetings with the African Union and Saudi Arabia, who are working hard to secure commitments from all parties, are also part of this effort. While I share the frustration over not having a set date for formal talks, it is important to understand that the work of Jeddah is continuous. Civilian participation, advocating for an end to the war and the restoration of constitutional governance, is crucial. Jeddah is just one component of a comprehensive peace and democracy plan for Sudan, including inclusive political dialogue and humanitarian access. We look forward to formalizing these talks soon.
Q: Sudanese military leader al Burhan has repeatedly said there will be no negotiation with the RSF until he achieves victory. What is the U.S. stance on this?
A: It is very clear that there is no military path to victory for either side. Generals may make statements to rally their troops, much like politicians do with their supporters, but the reality on the ground is different. Take the situation in El Fasher, for example; it is incredibly fragile. The only positive outcome is for the RSF to end the siege and for the SAF to avoid provocation. A continued battle will result in losses for both the RSF and SAF, but the biggest loss will be for the Sudanese people.
There is momentum toward a peace deal because there are still leaders who care about a sovereign and unified Sudan and the future of the military as an institution. I believe these talks can lead to a strong and stable Sudan, but this outcome must be determined by the Sudanese people.
Q: There are reports about entities inside and outside the region supporting parties in the Sudanese conflict. What is the U.S. doing about this?
A: Our message is clear: countries need to stop fuelling the war and arming factions. They must proactively participate in the peace process. These countries owe it to the Sudanese people to disengage from conflict and help ensure an end to the war, allowing the Sudanese people to reclaim their future.
Some countries appear willing to transition to being partners in peace, and we are increasing pressure on those that continue to play a toxic role, including foreign fighters. When I meet with Sudanese people, including those inside the country, one thing is clear: they want Sudan to be left alone to define its future. They will remember which countries fuelled the war and which ones helped deliver peace. There is still time for all countries in the region to make it clear that they are part of the solution.
Q: There are voices from among Sudanese refugees who say that they are being left out of the peace process in Sudan. Do you think there is consideration for them to be part of the negotiation this time?
A: I believe they are already part of the process. We think of Jeddah differently than others might. Jeddah is a place, but it is also about creating the political will to end the war in Sudan. Every time we see the incredible courage of Sudanese civilians in refugee and IDP camps speaking up, they are part of Jeddah and the broader peace process.
Sudanese civilians are the driving force behind the Jeddah process and the broader comprehensive deal, which aims to include them in a multi-year transition toward an inclusive political process. Their voices are shaping our priorities every day. While the efforts are there, what matters most to people are the results, and although we’ve fallen short, we are working hard to achieve meaningful outcomes.
Q: Since your appointment, you have never visited Sudan. There are unconfirmed reports that you have been denied a visa to enter Sudan. Can you shed more light on this?
A: During my visit to the camps in Chad, I was able to take a few steps into Sudan, just to touch the soil in Darfur again after many years. I am eager to travel throughout the country.
We initiated the process to obtain clearance for a trip and visas, reaching out to the Ministry of Diplomatic Security to prepare. While we still hope to make that trip, until it is cleared by the government, we will continue to meet with Sudanese people virtually and those who have recently fled Sudan. It is important to hear from a broad range of voices, and I have received positive feedback from Sudanese people that we are listening attentively. Even if we do not agree with everyone, it is vital to listen.
Q: Recently, the U.S. government issued sanctions on individuals for their role in the conflict. Does the U.S. think this will reduce the violence in Sudan?
A: In some cases, the sanctions have likely had an impact, but they have not yet achieved the ultimate goal of ending the war. It is important to understand these sanctions target individuals, not the entire country. They affect those individuals’ ability to travel and do business globally, particularly with entities connected to the U.S. financial system.
While some hardliners may downplay the sanctions as a badge of honor, they do have real consequences. However, sanctions alone are not a magic solution. They are part of a broader strategy to raise the costs for those committing atrocities and to encourage participation in peace talks. We must continue to consider additional measures to hold perpetrators accountable and support those working towards peace.
Q: Some observers anticipate that the former regime of Omar Hassan al Bashir might come back to power given the current situation in Sudan. What is the U.S. government’s position on this?
A: The key question is whether the Sudanese people want that, and the answer has been clear. From across Sudan—north, east, west, center—people, both young and old, are opposed to former regime officials or extremists returning to power. They are deeply offended by those who exploit their suffering and vulnerability to regain power, despite the people’s clear desire for new leadership.
The U.S. stands with the Sudanese people in their demand for a transition that allows them to determine their future. The transition process should reflect the will of the Sudanese people who have rejected the return of those who have disqualified themselves in their eyes.
Q: We spoke to the WFP last week and they mentioned that 18 million people in Sudan are starving. Only 6 million are accessible, while 12 million are without aid, stranded in RSF or SAF-controlled areas. What are you doing to push for humanitarian access to these needy people?
A: Let us be clear; people are starving because the SAF and the RSF are choosing to let them starve. This famine is a result of deliberate choices, not a natural disaster.
Under international humanitarian law, it is a basic rule that food and medicine must be able to reach people, even in the middle of a war. The SAF has chosen to shut down borders, block cross-line access, and create thousands of barriers, delays, and visa issues to prevent food and medicine from reaching those in need. This decision is causing people to die and children to become malnourished.
Similarly, the RSF has chosen to burn and loot harvests in storage, destroying any resilience the people had. These actions by the SAF and RSF have created this famine, and they have an obligation to fix it.
The first step is to follow the basic standards of international humanitarian law, which are respected worldwide; food and medicine must be allowed through. This includes supplies currently sitting in Port Sudan that could reach people in Khartoum and Omdurman but are being held up by bureaucratic barriers. The Sudanese people are literally starving, and these forces must allow access immediately to mitigate the crisis.
Q: Mr. Tom, what is your final message?
A: My message is for the Sudanese people. While there are political divisions, when it comes to peace, the Sudanese people are remarkably united. Every engagement with people inside and outside Sudan reveals the same desire; an end to the war. This means not just a ceasefire but pulling back forces to free cities and areas.
Immediate humanitarian access to every corner of Sudan is crucial so that every woman, child, and man can receive food and medicine. There is a need to restore the constitutional transition process that the people want. No country gets it right the first time, and civilian governance will be part of Sudan’s future.
There is also a need for a unified, professional military that is proud and accountable to the people. The Sudanese people do not want corrupt and extremist elements to use this as a backdoor path to power.
These clear messages from the Sudanese people form the baseline for Jeddah, which aims to produce a cessation of violence. Most key political questions need to be answered by the Sudanese people. The African Union is ready to be a great partner in this effort, and many of us will work with them on it.
The people need to be free from starvation, bombing from the air, and the atrocities committed daily by the RSF and others. These are the principles we are pushing for, even before Jeddah. The Sudanese people have asked us, as part of the international community, to deliver on these principles, and we are committed to doing so.