Sudan between Collapse and Civilian Option: An Investigation into the Dimensions of the Crisis
Since the outbreak of armed conflict in Sudan, the state has entered a phase of disintegration unseen in decades. Institutional and public service collapse is nearly total, while citizens live on the margins, trapped between conflict and the loss of essential services. This investigation is based on interviews with former government officials, economic experts, and public administration professors, as well as reviews of UN and international reports and documents, aiming to understand the scale of the crisis and the feasibility of a civilian institutional solution as a realistic option to save the state and restore its institutions.
Government documents and international reports indicate that more than 60% of civil service institutions operated before the war with less than half of their actual capacity due to politicization, inefficiency, and poor planning. With the onset of armed conflict, these institutions deteriorated further, and qualified staff left their positions out of fear of violence or due to the absence of salaries and essential services. A Ministry of Health employee described a “complete administrative vacuum” and explained that health facilities now rely on untrained volunteers, rendering service quality almost nonexistent, even in major cities. A UN report emphasizes that the collapse of services is not merely a consequence of war but a direct reflection of the absence of a stable and professional civilian system.
Field interviews conducted in Khartoum and the states of Darfur and Al Jazira show that military forces attempted to fill the gap but were unable to manage institutions or provide effective services. A crisis management expert from the University of Khartoum stated: “Armies can control territory, but they cannot manage a budget, operate a water station, or oversee an electricity network. Civil administration is the backbone of any state, and its absence means complete collapse.” Review of pre-war records from 11 states reveals that 70% of facility administrations relied on emergency committees or individual decisions rather than institutional systems, making the current collapse the result of years of institutional vacuum rather than the latest conflict alone.
Despite this grim picture, some successful models show that civil administration can endure. In Al Qadarif state, between 2022 and 2024, the water management unit managed to operate 80% of its stations by separating technical work from political influence and adopting a computerized monitoring system. In Port Sudan, doctors and administrators managed hospitals despite the war and secured international support, allowing them to provide a minimum level of services. These small experiences confirm that the civilian solution is not merely a slogan but can be practically applied if there is the will and the appropriate environment.
Financial data show that military spending dominates resources: in 2023, 78% of the budget was allocated to the security sector versus only 8% for essential services, revealing a fundamental imbalance in resource allocation and confirming that a military solution, however strong, cannot restore state functions. Economically, local studies estimate that Sudan loses around $35 million daily due to disrupted production chains and weak resource oversight, and that professional civil administration could reduce this loss by 40% within one year through better taxation, market organization, and restoring investor confidence.
Interviews with local institution officials indicate that a civilian solution does not mean excluding the army but redefining its role to protect the country rather than manage civil services. The army is not qualified to run hospitals, schools, or infrastructure projects, making civil administration vital for restoring stability. Furthermore, building strong civil institutions reduces the likelihood of renewed conflict, as it creates a stable authority capable of controlling resources and organizing society without recourse to military force.
The investigation also shows that the civilian solution requires internal cooperation and international support. Domestically, political and civil forces must agree to separate service provision from conflict and establish an independent administration capable of managing the transitional phase. Internationally, Sudan needs technical and financial support to restore essential services and train staff, as well as expertise from countries and specialized organizations to build effective and stable institutions.
Despite significant challenges, the opportunity to rebuild the state exists. Military and political collapse has revealed institutional fragility and rendered the logic of force ineffective for restoring services. The current moment appears optimal for implementing a civilian institutional solution before the country reaches a point of no return, where state management would become impossible even if the war stopped tomorrow.
The investigation concludes that Sudan urgently needs to rebuild civil administration, as it is the only way to save the state, restore services, revive the economy, and secure citizens’ lives. Any delay would perpetuate chaos and destruction, whereas professional civil administration represents the sole opportunity to stabilize the country and build a state capable of withstanding future conflicts. The investigation demonstrates that military solutions are limited and short-term, while a civilian institutional solution is the realistic and optimal path for Sudan’s survival and reconstruction.
