The presence of Tigray leaders in Sudan raises regional concerns: facts and realities on the ground
Well-informed local and regional sources have confirmed that the President of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, Debretsion Gebremichael, arrived in Sudan in recent weeks under strict security measures and with significant attention from Sudanese authorities. This visit comes at a time of increasing tensions along the Sudan–Ethiopia border, raising concerns about a possible military escalation or an unprecedented political development within the framework of bilateral relations between Khartoum and Addis Ababa.
According to field reports, Debretsion’s arrival took place through a domestic airport in Khartoum, and his movements were secured by limited military units. Sources indicate that Sudanese officials coordinated the visit to ensure his safety, reflecting the sensitivity of the matter and the importance of the figures involved. Activities were concentrated in the capital and in certain northeastern border areas, where meetings are believed to have addressed security and political coordination, as well as issues related to border territories and shared security risks.
Official Sudanese sources confined their statements to affirming their commitment to “ensuring security and stability,” without disclosing details of the meetings or the nature of coordination with Tigray. Meanwhile, the Ethiopian government expressed concern over the “use of Sudanese territory to support armed opposition movements,” considering this a potential direct threat to its national security. Statements from Addis Ababa officials emphasized that they are closely monitoring the situation and warned that any escalation could lead to heightened tensions between the two countries, making the management of this file highly sensitive.
Investigative sources clarified that Debretsion’s visit included meetings with several Sudanese military leaders, as well as political discussions with opposition figures and representatives of certain border tribes. The aim was reportedly to discuss border security issues and cooperation in monitoring Ethiopian troop movements in adjacent areas. According to field experts, this step suggests that Sudan may be seeking to strengthen its on-the-ground capabilities by maintaining communication with Tigrayan factions amid ongoing tensions in the northeastern regions, which have previously witnessed limited clashes between the Sudanese army and its Ethiopian counterpart.
The leaders’ movements within Sudan were also subject to international and regional monitoring, with some states expressing interest in the visit and its potential impact on stability in the Horn of Africa. Reports indicate that contacts are ongoing between Khartoum and several Arab and regional capitals to follow developments, reflecting international concern about the possible consequences for regional balances. Field observations further suggest that Sudan is deliberately refraining from publicly disclosing official details in order to avoid a hostile reaction from Addis Ababa, while simultaneously attempting to keep diplomatic channels open.
Investigative sources confirmed that the visit followed a series of communications and logistical preparations, including precise security arrangements to prevent any potential threats during movements. Some field meetings reportedly focused on intelligence and security cooperation, including monitoring Ethiopian troop movements and overseeing the situation in border areas. These measures reflect Khartoum’s awareness of the sensitivity of the situation and its determination to manage the matter with extreme caution in order to safeguard its interests without sliding into direct confrontation.
In addition, sources noted that Debretsion’s visit included meetings with certain tribal actors in border regions, highlighting the importance of establishing a local support network to secure movements and field activities. These meetings fall within a Sudanese strategy aimed at ensuring security and stability in border areas, while seeking to leverage the presence of Ethiopian opposition leaders to enhance surveillance and control on the ground.
At the same time, the visit has generated varied reactions among international observers. Some have stressed the need for careful handling to prevent any escalation, while others consider Sudan to have become a pivotal actor in the regional file, particularly in the context of border disputes and humanitarian crises that have affected relations between the two countries.
The confirmed sensitivity of the visit underscores the complexity of the region’s security and political landscape. Balancing potential engagement with Ethiopian opposition actors while maintaining strong official ties with the central government in Addis Ababa represents a major strategic challenge, especially amid rising border tensions and areas marked by limited yet persistent military activity.
In conclusion, Debretsion Gebremichael’s visit to Sudan stands out as an exceptional development that places Khartoum at the center of the Horn of Africa’s regional balance. It represents a convergence point between Sudan’s internal security, border challenges, and broader regional dynamics within a tense and complex environment. As Khartoum continues to manage this file cautiously, the central question remains whether regional actors will be able to preserve stability and prevent any escalation that could lead to direct confrontation between Sudan and Ethiopia.
