Five key developments in international relations this week: 05 -09 May 2025🔍🌍

⚔️⚔️SITREP : Sudan conflict

Having entered its third year in mid-April, the devastation and carnage brought about by the war in Sudan continues unabated. Late March marked a turning point in the conflict following the recapture of the tri-cities of Khartoum state – Bahri, Omdurman, and Khartoum – by the Sudanese Armed Forces’ (SAF) as a result of a multi-pronged offensive campaign that began at the end of September 2024. Consequently, the SAF’s offensive operations have pushed the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to retreat westward and southward, with the latter’s forces mostly concentrated in its stronghold in Darfur region, as well as parts of South Kordofan and Blue Nile states, thanks to an alliance with the SPLM-N led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu.

While the SAF has the upper hand in central Khartoum and Bahri, areas in western and southern Omdurman remain contested and under RSF influence. On 01 May, the RSF shelled the presidential palace in Khartoum in their second bombardment of the capital in less than a week. An army source reported the shelling came from the Al-Salha district across the White Nile, their closest position since the army recaptured Khartoum in March. On the same day, the RSF seized the strategic city of Al Nahud, West Kordofan state, which links the Kordofan and Darfur regions. The city had served as a temporary administrative capital and is a vital commercial hub. Al Nahud's loss is particularly significant as it complicates the army’s efforts to break the siege of el Fasher in North Darfur, the only state capital in Darfur that remains under SAF’s control.

As the army seeks to mount offensives in RSF strongholds in a bid to consolidate its control over the entire country, the paramilitary force has ramped up operations, increasingly making use of drones to target strategic locations deep within SAF-controlled territory. Beginning on 04 May, the RSF launched a series of drone strikes targeting critical infrastructure in Port Sudan, including the Osman Digna airbase, fuel depots, the city’s main container terminal, and the international airport. Port Sudan, previously considered a safe haven and the de facto administrative capital following the RSF’s takeover of Khartoum in April 2023, had largely been spared from direct conflict. The strategic Red Sea port city had served as an interim seat for Sudan’s military-allied government, in addition to being a vital logistics and relief hub. The drone attacks have resulted in widespread fires, power outages, and the suspension of humanitarian aid flights, cutting off a crucial lifeline for desperately-needed humanitarian deliveries. On 09 May, the army reported that it had repelled RSF drone attacks over central Port Sudan, and northern areas of the city where the army’s Flamingo naval base is located.

The RSF’s drone strikes against Port Sudan are not only a demonstration of their long-range aerial capabilities, but also a messaging of strategic adaptation. Among their objectives is to undermine the SAF’s ability to provide safety and security in areas under their control. Sudan’s army has accused the United Arab Emirates (UAE) of supplying advanced drones to the RSF. A notable report by Yale’s Humanitarian Research Lab linked artillery used by the RSF to weaponry exclusively purchased by the UAE. Similarly, Amnesty International released a report on 08 May that detailed the use of Chinese GB50A guided bombs and 155mm AH-4 howitzers by the RSF, noting that these weapons – manufactured by the Norinco Group, also known as China North Industries Group Corporation Limited – were almost certainly re-exported to Sudan by the UAE.

Relatedly, an RSF drone reportedly targeted fuel depots in Kosti, White Nile State, on 08 May causing fires and significant infrastructural damage. The same wave of attacks allegedly struck the army's 18th Division headquarters and positions in Tendelti, west of Kosti, resulting in casualties

On 06 May, Sudan’s security and defence council severed diplomatic ties with the UAE over its support for the RSF, a day after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) dismissed a case by the Sudanese government accusing Abu Dhabi of complicity in genocide. The court dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds after the judges voted by 14 to 2. Specifically, the UAE’s reservation to Article IX of the Genocide Convention effectively blocked legal action. The ICJ’s decision was divisive, sparking criticism from human rights organisations concerned about its implications for international accountability for atrocity crimes and IHL violations.

Elsewhere, in El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur and the last state capital in Darfur not under RSF control, the RSF has stepped up its assault on the city and its surrounds in recent weeks, overrunning displacement camps and pounding the city with artillery bombardments. Last month, the RSF claimed to have seized control of the Zamzam refugee camp in El Fasher following a series of attacks that resulted in the death of at least 300 civilians and displacement of about 400,000 people. On 09 May, at least 10 people were killed by RSF artillery shelling in the Abushouk camp for displaced people, located near Zamzam camp, which has also been the target of intense bombardment.

The humanitarian situation remains dire, with the UN raising concerns over worsening famine and a  surge in displacement amid escalating violence. The UN estimated that 12 million people have been displaced within Sudan, with nearly four million having fled to neighbouring countries. Over half the population is suffering acute food insecurity, with famine conditions confirmed in various regions, leaving millions at risk of starvation.

Prospects for Ceasefire and Resolution: The prospects for a ceasefire and mediation efforts in the Sudan war appear dim, largely complicated by the continued support of the warring parties by foreign powers. Both the RSF and SAF have demonstrated intention to continue fighting, with prolonged conflict edging Sudan further into fragmented and militarised rule, moving it away from hopes of a civilian-led democracy. From a regional perspective, the internationalization of the conflict also heightens the risk of spillover, potentially drawing neighbouring countries in, as evinced by the Sudanese army’s threats against countries like Chad and South Sudan for allegedly supporting the RSF. Overall, the long-term trajectory of the conflict will likely depend on the ability of both sides to maintain alliances and manage internal dynamics. 

India and Pakistan agree to ceasefire after days of military exchanges and escalating tensions

India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire on 10 May after four days of escalating military exchanges involving drones, loitering munitions, missiles, artillery, and fighter aircraft. The ceasefire, which  halted all firing and operations by land, air, and sea, was reportedly brokered by multiple international actors, although U.S. President Trump was quick to claim credit for brokering the deal.

Tensions between the two countries escalated rapidly following a terrorist attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in Pahalgam on 22 April, during which 26 men were killed. India accused Pakistan of being behind the attack, which was claimed by a militant group calling itself Kashmir Resistance. Islamabad has denied its involvement in the Pahalgam attack and called for neutral investigations into the incident.

The conflict evolved through distinct escalation and de-escalation phases, beginning with India’s suspension of  its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty that Pakistan relies on for its water supply on 23 April, a move that was perceived as a hostile act by Pakistan. On 07 May, India launched multiple missile attacks targeting sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir early on Wednesday in an attack it called “Operation Sindoor”. India stated its objective was to target "terrorist infrastructure" and disable militants likely to be sent across the border. India claimed to have hit nine sites across Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, including alleged training camps of groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM). Pakistan said that India’s missile strikes killed at least 31 civilians, injured 57 others and damaged civilian infrastructures. In response, Pakistan responded with defensive air operations using Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters equipped with PL-15 missiles, in an intense dogfight with Indian jet fighters that reportedly resulted in the downing of five Indian planes, including three Rafale jets. By May 10, Pakistan had escalated beyond reactive defence to launch “Operation Bunyan Marsoos,” targeting military infrastructure including airbases in Udhampur and Pathankot along with a BrahMos missile facility in Punjab. Both sides employed drone warfare, with India deploying Israeli-made Harop drones and Pakistan utilizing Turkish-manufactured Asisguard Songar drones.

Following the announcement of the ceasefire, both India and Pakistan accused each other of violating the deal amid reports of explosions heard in Indian-administered Kashmir. Despite the fragile nature of the ceasefire, military channels were reactivated and the directors general of military operations of the two countries agreed to hold talks again on 12 May. Overall, the recent India-Pakistan crisis underscores the volatile nature of relations between the two state since independence in 1947, which have been marked by skirmishes and military confrontations. These include: the first war in 1947; the 1965 Indo-Pakistani war which  concluded with the Soviet-mediated Tashkent Declaration in January 1966; the 1971 war which saw India attack Punjab province, the 1999 Kargil war, and a tense stand-off in 2002 following an attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001.

U.S-China trade negotiations

China and the U.S. reached an agreement on 12 May to temporarily slash tariffs imposed on each other last month, marking a significant de-escalation of a trade war which had sparked fears of a global recession and erosion of established norms of the multilateral trading system. The talks, held 10-11 May in Geneva, Switzerland, culminated in the deal which entailed a 90-day ceasefire of sorts on the trade war, with stated intent to continue talks aimed at a more comprehensive agreement in the weeks ahead. The U.S. agreed to slash tariffs on Chinese imports from 145% to 30%, whereas China will cut its retaliatory duties on U.S imports from 125% to 10%. China also agreed to suspend or remove non-tariff countermeasures implemented since 02 April in response to the U.S tariffs. These measures included increased export controls on rare earths and adding American companies to export control and unreliable entity lists.

The news of the trade ceasefire was met with widespread positive reactions in global markets. Stock markets in Hong Kong, the US (S&P 500, Nasdaq Composite, Dow Jones Industrial Average futures), and Europe (STOXX 600) all saw significant rises. In currency markets, the dollar gained against the euro and the Japanese yen, reversing gains seen by safe-haven currencies like the yen and Swiss franc after the previous tariff escalations. Spot gold prices , which hit an all-time high of $3,500 last month fell 2.6% to $3,237.4 an ounce.

Overall, the deal has been welcomed as a reprieve and upliftment to the outlook for the global economy, in addition to benefitting the economies of both countries. However, some analysts have asserted thathe agreement, which significantly lowers tariffs without any concessions, is likely to be viewed as a particular victory for China.China's April trade data, which showed resilient exports despite tariff hikes, may have strengthened its hand heading into the Switzerland negotiations. Despite the positive reaction, significant uncertainties remain. The 90-day pause is just a temporary truce, and difficult negotiations are still to come, especially with regards to issues such as U.S concerns about non-tariff barriers, subsidies for labour and capital, and market access.

🌐Geopolitics and history

Victory Day – 80^th  anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in 1945

Commemorations for the 80^th  anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II took place on both May 8th (primarily in Europe) and May 9th (in Russia). 28 foreign leaders attended the celebrations in Moscow, in a show of strong support for Russia particularly during the present epoch in global politics characterised by polarisation and divisive rhetoric. Among the attendees were Chinese President Xi Jinping, Burkinabé President Ibrahim Traoré, and a number of progressive Latin American leaders. Also present were representatives of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and others. In contrast to the strong presence from the Global South, European political leaders were largely absent from the Moscow event; Serbia’s Aleksandar Vučić and Slovakia’s Robert Fico were the only European leaders in attendance.

In his address, President Putin honoured the memory of all who gave their lives for Victory in the Great Patriotic War, noting that Russia will continue to defend against those who support Nazism, Russophobia and anti-Semitism. Putin also asserted that Russia remembered the lessons of World War II and would not stand for “the distortion of those events or attempts to justify the murderers and slander the true victors.” Highlighting the pivotal role of the Soviet Union in the victory over the Nazis, Putin recognised contribution of the allied forces , noting that “the Soviet Union bore the brunt of the enemy’s most savage and relentless assaults,”, adding that it was the Soviet people who “determined the outcome” of World War II through “decisive victories in major battles.”

Security was a major aspect of this year’s Moscow parade, amid reports of Ukrainian drone attacks targeting Moscow and disrupted air traffic at Moscow’s airports. Tightened security around the celebrations also led to restrictions on cell phone internet service and reports of outages. Overall, the split screen in Russia and the West of commemorations of the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany, is an apt representation of the current geopolitical climate, tainted with polarised ideologies, increasingly bellicose rhetoric and a tendency by some parties to engage in historical revisionism on matters such as the Soviet Union’s monumental role in the liberation of Europe in World War II.

Key Asian economies leading the gradual shift away from the US dollar

Recent developments in Asia, particularly among its largest economies, suggest a growing inclination to reduce reliance on the U.S dollar for trade and financial transactions. Most recently, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), plus China, Japan, and South Korea (ASEAN+3) on 05 May approved a new mechanism designed to offer quick financial assistance to economies experiencing urgent balance-of-payments challenges. The mechanism, which will for the first time use regional currencies including the Chinese yuan, is part of the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralisation (CMIM) – a currency swap arrangement among the 10 ASEAN members, plus China, Japan and South Korea. This move, coupled with increasing demand for non-dollar currency derivatives and a shift in corporate hedging strategies, is driven by factors including the financial volatility stemming from US trade policies, a desire for greater regional financial autonomy, and China's long-term efforts to internationalize the yuan. Despite the growing momentum, reports of rapid de-dollarisation have been exaggerated – the US dollar represents 54% of global export invoicing, 57% of official foreign exchange reserves, and is used in 88% of foreign exchange transactions, highlighting its enduring status as global reserve currency. Overall, these developments and trends in Asia are reflective of not only structural changes in use of the dollar, but also notable shifts in the regional financial landscape with a view to broadening scope for use of regional currencies.

The election of Friedrich Merz as Germany's chancellor was off to a rocky start on 06 May, after a surprising initial defeat in the first round of parliamentary voting. Merz, leading a new coalition government formed by his Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU) alliance and the centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) received 310 votes in the first round, well short of the 328 seats held by his coalition. In the second round, he garnered 325 votes, nine more than needed for an absolute majority. The failure to secure a majority in the first round was a historical first in post-war Germany and an indication of potential disunity within the new governing coalition. Arguably, some MPs from the CDU/CSU wanted to show their clear dissatisfaction with Merz's U-turn on fiscal policy following the elections, in addition to grumblings about cabinet nominations, policy compromises and a borrowing package passed in March that upended decades of Germany’s fiscal policy.