Kenya’s renewed push for an inclusive and unified peace process in Sudan is facing mounting scrutiny amid accusations that Nairobi’s engagement with actors linked to the conflict risks undermining its credibility as a neutral broker.
In recent remarks after meeting UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy for Sudan, Pekka Haavisto, the Foreign Affairs CS warned that the continued flow of arms into Sudan risks deepening the conflict and triggering wider regional instability.
Mudavadi also reiterated that there can be no military solution, calling instead for an inclusive dialogue bringing together political actors, civil society, and community leaders.
“For meaningful progress on peace in Sudan, a unified and inclusive peace process is essential—one that brings all key actors to the same table and ends the cycle of fragmented negotiations and forum shopping,” Mudavadi said in a statement.
He added that as long as the parties to the conflict—the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)—remain locked in a contest of force, lasting peace will remain out of reach.
“Dialogue must prevail, and all sides must commit to negotiations to safeguard the lives of millions, particularly women and children who continue to bear the heaviest burden,” he said.
However, Nairobi’s diplomatic posture has drawn criticism from Sudan’s army, the SAF, which has accused Kenya of effectively backing its rival, the RSF. The concerns stem from Kenya’s decision to host RSF-linked meetings in Nairobi, as well as reports that RSF commanders have been received or accommodated within the city’s outskirts—moves the SAF argues amount to political legitimisation of the paramilitary group.
In February last year, the Sudanese junta accused Kenya of hostility after it allowed the RSF to host activities at the state-owned Kenyatta International Convention Centre.
They have also directly accused President William Ruto of having commercial interests linked to the RSF, which has hardened their rejection of the Kenyan leader as a potential lead mediator within the IGAD framework.
This year, Kenya’s immigration office was accused of issuing passports to RSF leaders—an exposé that drew both local and international condemnation.
The Human Rights Foundation said the alleged issuance of passports to figures connected to the RSF could enable sanctioned actors to evade international restrictions and raised serious questions about Nairobi’s role in the Sudan conflict.
The group warned that the developments represent “another troubling twist” in the relationship between President Ruto’s administration and the RSF.
This is further compounded by investigations, including a 2025 probe aligned with United Nations findings, which identified weapons bearing Kenyan markings in areas controlled by the RSF.
While there is no conclusive evidence of direct state involvement, the reports have raised questions about possible diversion, illicit supply chains, or gaps in oversight.
In particular, an investigation by the Nation Forensic Unit and Bellingcat in June 2025 found crates of ammunition marked for the Kenya Ministry of Defence in depots previously controlled by the RSF in Khartoum.
While the Kenyan government denied the allegations, the investigations indicated that the weapons—likely produced in 2024—were diverted to Sudan after the war began in April 2023.
Reports also allege that Jomo Kenyatta International Airport has been used as a logistics hub for transporting weapons, including drones and ammunition, to the RSF—often under the guise of humanitarian aid.
These developments point to a growing credibility challenge for Nairobi.
Its call for a unified peace process is rooted in the failure of fragmented negotiations, yet its own actions risk feeding perceptions of partiality—one of the very issues that has historically undermined mediation efforts in Sudan.
Kenya has sought to frame its approach as inclusive rather than partisan, arguing that durable peace requires engaging all actors, not isolating them. Its push to broaden the process to include elders, women, youth, and religious leaders reflects a shift away from elite-driven talks that have repeatedly collapsed.
Still, the optics remain challenging.
By warning against arms flows while facing questions over both political engagement with the RSF and the presence of Kenyan-marked weapons in conflict zones, Nairobi risks being perceived as contradictory.
This comes even as Mudavadi cautioned that continued instability could spill across borders, fuelling regional insecurity through refugee flows, arms trafficking, and cross-border militancy.
