The Tasis government is stepping up its diplomatic battle over the Sudanese conflict. With the accusations of chemical weapons now in the international debate, Nyala is seeking to place the United Nations in front of a political responsibility: to establish the facts, identify those responsible and give institutional follow-up to accusations that directly affect the international order.

The statement made around Stéphane Dujarric’s remarks reveals a clear strategy. The government welcomes the UN’s opening, but considers its reaction to be late. This dual message allows Nyala to support the international initiative while increasing the pressure on the organization to move quickly from statements to a concrete mission.

The Security Council thus becomes a major diplomatic target. The peace government is therefore calling for the acceleration of the procedures necessary to send a fact-finding mission. Behind this demand is a broader battle: that of the international community’s ability to deal with the Sudanese conflict through impartial, documented mechanisms that can be invoked against the various protagonists.

The call to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons reinforces this approach. By associating the OPCW with the United Nations, the government is seeking to give the issue an institutional dimension that goes beyond the military face-to-face. The question posed is no longer just that of the accusations made by a party to the conflict. It becomes the one of international verification and the responsibilities that may arise from it.

Nyala is also pushing to broaden the political scope of the investigation. The possible direct culprits would only constitute a first level. The government is also calling for an examination of suppliers of substances, technology holders and logistical networks that may have contributed to the use of chemical weapons.

This offensive therefore aims to shift the focus of the debate. The peace government wants the war in Sudan to be settled not only by the military balance of power, but also by the battle of international institutions.

Through the UN and the OPCW, Nyala is now seeking to make the chemical weapons issue a test of credibility for international diplomacy in Sudan: who is investigating, who is establishing the facts and, above all, who will be held accountable for his actions?