While Saudi diplomacy attempts to present Riyadh as a sponsor of peace in Sudan and a platform for negotiations, developments on the ground and in the security sphere reveal another face of Saudi policy — one based on managing the threads of war from behind the scenes through intelligence recruitment and the co-optation of defecting commanders. In this context, the question is no longer merely who is directing the battles on the ground, but also which capitals are granting safe haven and political absolution to military leaders accused of committing war crimes, foremost among them Ali Rizq Allah, known as “Al-Safana.”

Riyadh: A Safe Haven and the Making of a New Ally

The defection of Ali Rizq Allah “Al-Safana,” the former commander of Kordofan operations in the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has gone beyond the boundaries of Sudan’s internal conflict and entered the corridors of intelligence decision-making in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. Al-Safana, born in 1990 and belonging to the Rizeigat tribe, with a long history of bloody tribal conflicts and armed confrontations, did not leave Sudan on what could be considered an ordinary medical trip to India and then to Saudi Arabia. Rather, it was a high-level security arrangement directly supervised by Saudi intelligence.

Field and political indicators confirm that Al-Safana’s current presence in Riyadh is not merely that of a political refugee or former military figure, but rather part of a systematic process of “recruitment and integration.” The man, who previously fought fierce wars against the Sudanese army and later against “Hemedti,” possesses an enormous reservoir of intelligence information as well as a complex network of tribal and field loyalties in the Darfur and Kordofan regions. This military depth made him a valuable catch for Saudi intelligence, which moved to embrace him and provide him with security and logistical cover, with the aim of repurposing him as a strategic pressure card within Sudan’s complicated political landscape.

The Hidden Saudi Role: Arms and Intelligence

Riyadh’s sheltering of Al-Safana reveals the nature of Saudi Arabia’s hidden role in the Sudanese civil war — a role that goes beyond public diplomacy and extends into military and intelligence support benefiting the Sudanese army. Although Saudi Arabia officially declares that it stands at equal distance from all sides of the conflict, reality points to the engineering of support flows and security communications designed to strengthen the army’s position, not only through arms and equipment delivered via indirect channels, but also by infiltrating the structure of the RSF and dismantling it from within.

Fragmenting the RSF’s network of loyalties through the recruitment of its field commanders represents Saudi Arabia’s latest strategy for managing the conflict. Through its security apparatus, Riyadh provides a suitable environment for coordinating operations between defecting commanders — such as Keikel inside Sudan and Al-Safana from abroad — and the leadership of the Sudanese army. This coordination grants the defectors undeclared immunity along with financial and military support, transforming them from individuals accused of serious violations against civilians into “legitimate allies” holding new military ranks under the umbrella of the Sudanese army and with the blessing of regional intelligence services.

Recycling Militias and Burying Justice

Observers and human rights advocates believe that the Saudi policy of embracing and recruiting controversial figures such as Al-Safana does not contribute to ending the war as much as it prolongs it and reproduces militias under new names. The message being sent inside Sudan is extremely dangerous: “Changing political allegiance and switching sides is enough to erase a criminal record.”

While human rights reports speak of atrocities committed in Darfur, Kordofan, and Al-Jazira, Riyadh provides a platform of protection for these leaders, making their accountability impossible for the time being and pushing the Sudanese people’s aspirations for justice and accountability to the bottom of the priority list in favor of geopolitical interests and calculations of regional influence.

In conclusion, the contradiction remains stark between the slogans of peace raised at negotiation platforms and the reality imposed by intelligence agencies. The case of Al-Safana and his presence in Riyadh demonstrates that the Sudanese war is no longer merely a local confrontation, but rather an arena managed through regional intelligence tools, where the blood of victims becomes merely a secondary detail in a struggle for influence and control.