Report on Saudi Diplomacy in Washington and Growing Tensions with the United Arab Emirates Over the War in Sudan
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has embarked on a high-profile visit to the United States in an effort to influence Washington’s position on the war in Sudan. His goal, according to publicly available accounts and diplomatic reporting, is to convince President Donald Trump that sustained American pressure is indispensable for bringing an end to the conflict. This comes as international concerns rise over the role regional powers have played in prolonging or shaping the trajectory of the war, particularly the United Arab Emirates, which faces mounting scrutiny for its reported support for the Rapid Support Forces, the main paramilitary actor in the Sudanese conflict.
Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have long presented themselves as close strategic partners, yet tensions between the two states have surfaced repeatedly in recent years. Analysts have documented growing policy divergences on Yemen, Libya and the Horn of Africa. Although high-level personal relations between Mohammed bin Salman and Abu Dhabi’s leaders have often been framed as warm, regional observers note that their national interests increasingly diverge, especially in areas where both states seek influence and security assurances.
The war in Sudan is one such area. Saudi Arabia shares Red Sea coastline with Sudan and has deep strategic interest in regional stability, maritime security and the safe flow of goods and energy. It has therefore supported mediation initiatives and co-sponsored diplomatic efforts aimed at halting the fighting. The Jeddah talks, conducted in partnership with the United States, were one of the major attempts to secure a ceasefire. While those negotiations repeatedly broke down, the kingdom has continued to position itself as a would-be broker, arguing that unchecked escalation threatens the entire region.
In contrast, the United Arab Emirates has been accused by the United States, United Nations experts and multiple investigative outlets of supplying arms and logistical support to the Rapid Support Forces. The Emirates has categorically denied these accusations, insisting it backs diplomatic solutions and provides only humanitarian aid. However, satellite imagery, weapons tracing and testimony from humanitarian workers and Sudanese officials have raised persistent questions about the flow of arms to the paramilitary group. Reports by major investigative media, including Middle East Eye and international human rights organisations, have described supply chains extending through Libya, Chad and other regional routes, with munitions initially manufactured in the United Kingdom or China ending up in Rapid Support Forces stockpiles.
These developments have heightened Saudi concerns that the conflict could spiral further, threatening Red Sea security and inviting more regional fragmentation. As a result, Mohammed bin Salman’s current mission in Washington is being closely watched. According to public diplomatic commentary, Saudi officials have been urging the United States to use its leverage with regional partners, including the Emirates, to stem the flow of weapons into Sudan. President Trump’s administration has publicly acknowledged awareness of external support reaching the Rapid Support Forces and has hinted that private conversations are under way with unnamed governments to halt such assistance.
Reporting by Middle East Eye has pointed to friction between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates regarding the future of the war. According to those accounts, Saudi officials believe that an end to the conflict is impossible without restraining the paramilitary group’s foreign backers. The same reporting describes conversations between Mohammed bin Salman and the commander of the Sudanese Armed Forces, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, in which the Sudanese leader is said to have urged the crown prince to persuade Washington that pressure on the Emirates is essential. These accounts have not been independently verified by all media and should be understood within that context, yet they align with the clear divergence in Saudi and Emirati behaviour toward the warring Sudanese factions.
In Washington, lobbying over the war has intensified. Advocacy groups, think tanks and foreign agents representing Gulf interests have sought to shape American understanding of the conflict. Public filings under the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act show that both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates maintain extensive networks in the American capital. Analysts note that the Emirates in particular has invested heavily in projecting its narrative about regional security and counterterrorism cooperation. Critics argue that this lobbying has at times obscured concerns about the Rapid Support Forces and its extensive record of abuses, including atrocities documented by human rights monitors in Darfur and other regions.
Mohammed bin Salman’s effort to reposition Saudi Arabia as a stabilising force reflects the kingdom’s desire to distance itself from entanglements that previously strained its reputation. While the two Gulf states remain bound by shared strategic interests, their approaches to the Sudan war reveal deepening competition. The outcome of the crown prince’s discussions in Washington may determine not only the direction of United States policy but also whether the regional rivalry will continue to play out on Sudanese soil or shift toward a coordinated push for peace.
This delicate diplomatic moment underscores a broader truth: the war in Sudan is no longer only a national tragedy but a mirror reflecting the competing ambitions, anxieties and influence campaigns of powerful regional actors.
