Sudan Military Chief Gen. Abdel-Fattah Burhan Rejects US-Led Ceasefire Proposal

Sudan’s military chief, Gen. Abdel‑Fattah al‑Burhan, publicly rejected a U.S.‑backed ceasefire and transition package proposed by regional and international mediators.

“Al-Burhan rejected Boulos’s claims that the government has blocked humanitarian convoys and used chemical weapons, and called for a return to the Sovereignty Council’s February roadmap, which includes pillars such as an inclusive national dialogue”

Al-Jazeera Net

The plan called for a three‑month humanitarian truce followed by a nine‑month political process to install civilian rule.

Al-Jazeera Net

The proposal was presented by a group described as the Quad, consisting of the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE.

It was reported to include both an immediate pause to enable aid deliveries and a subsequent political transition.

The RSF paramilitary publicly accepted the truce, but Burhan angrily rejected it as biased, arguing it would marginalize formal armed forces and leave militias intact.

Burhan said the package was biased toward the RSF, would marginalize the armed forces and leave militias intact, and pushed for a return to the Sovereignty Council's February roadmap, including an inclusive national dialogue, instead of the U.S.-led proposal.

He dismissed claims attributed to U.S. adviser Massad Boulos that his government blocked humanitarian convoys and used chemical weapons, and also denied AP reports that he criticized Boulos and accused the UAE of supporting the RSF.

Al-Jazeera Net

The rejection comes amid a deepening humanitarian catastrophe documented across multiple outlets.

“Regional mediators — Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and the U”

Anadolu Ajansı

Aid groups and reporting point to massive displacement, acute food insecurity, and alarming local evidence of mass civilian harm.

The U.N. and several outlets place displacement and suffering in the millions.

AP calls it a "vast humanitarian catastrophe" with more than 14 million people displaced.

Daily Sabah references U.N. estimates and WHO reports, describing cities declared in famine and thousands of deaths.

Dabanga summarizes Yale Humanitarian Research Lab findings of likely mass killings, cremations, and depopulation in El-Fasher.

Diplomatic reactions and the positions of the conflict parties differ sharply.

The RSF publicly accepted the truce.

Anadolu Ajansı

Burhan rejected the truce and accused mediators and certain states of bias.

The UAE described Burhan's rejection as obstructive, and U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged an immediate ceasefire and unfettered humanitarian access.

Reports note that diplomatic pressure from regional leaders has pushed the issue onto international agendas, even as Burhan insists on alternative roadmaps and domestic political safeguards.

Across the coverage there is a clear split in emphasis and tone.

“Sudan’s military chief Gen”

Associated Press

Western mainstream outlets represented here (Associated Press) emphasize the diplomatic package, international calls for a ceasefire, and reporting on political recriminations.

Associated Press

West Asian outlets (Anadolu Ajansı, Al‑Jazeera, Daily Sabah) stress regional mediation roles, Burhan’s political demands, and acute humanitarian impact.

Western alternative and other outlets (Middle East Monitor, Dabanga) underscore on‑the‑ground indicators of mass civilian harm and displacement.

Those differences shape how readers understand whether the story is primarily a diplomatic failure, a political power struggle, or evidence of large‑scale crimes against civilians.