Full Analysis Summary
Port Sudan facility frozen
Sudan’s military has frozen plans for a Russian naval facility on the Red Sea, saying that "all procedures related to a Port Sudan facility 'remain frozen'."
The military told the Eastleigh Voice that neither Khartoum nor Moscow acted on the proposal this year, citing a senior official.
That clarification contradicts recent headlines suggesting a formal 25-year deal with Russia and frames the issue as stalled amid the country’s internal conflict.
The military and reporting say ongoing fighting and the need to prioritise a domestic crisis are the reasons the plan has not progressed.
The Eastleigh Voice adds that the crisis has reportedly caused about 150,000 deaths and displaced nearly 12 million people.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction
The Eastleigh Voice (Local Western) reports that the proposal “remain[s] frozen” and that ‘neither Khartoum nor Moscow has acted on the proposal this year,’ explicitly contradicting a Wall Street Journal report referenced by Eastleigh Voice that ‘said Sudan had offered Russia a 25-year deal.’ Dabanga Radio (Other) aligns with the freeze but frames the naval-base headlines as media exaggeration and notes analysts deny any offer has been made, saying such talk ‘amuses people briefly’ and ‘denied any offer has been made by either side.’
Why talks halted
Local reporting frames the freeze as a direct response to the civil war's toll and the military's stated need to prioritise internal stability.
The Eastleigh Voice attributes the halt to 'ongoing internal fighting and the need to prioritise the domestic crisis,' noting a humanitarian toll reportedly of around 150,000 killed and nearly 12 million displaced.
That context is presented as the primary explanation for why discussions that began as early as 2020 — and which a former Sudanese foreign minister said had agreed details in February — have seen no further advances.
Coverage Differences
Emphasis/Tone
The Eastleigh Voice (Local Western) emphasises humanitarian and domestic-security reasons for freezing the plan, giving casualty and displacement figures and noting earlier talks beginning in 2020 and alleged February agreement details. Dabanga Radio (Other) similarly stresses that the country’s ‘real crisis’ should not be overshadowed by headlines, but its commentary adds skepticism about the strategic value and political utility of such talks, suggesting they ‘amuse people briefly’ and that General Burhan ‘overestimates the leverage of strategic coastlines.’
Dabanga perspective on base claims
Independent commentators cited by Dabanga Radio add a different emphasis.
They portray recent coverage as inflated and warn that the base story may be used politically to provoke reactions rather than reflecting concrete diplomacy.
Dabanga quotes Major General Dr Mutasim Abdelqader saying the issue has been revived to provoke a negative US reaction and denying that any offer has been made by either side.
The report also suggests Russia is unlikely to pursue a new base given its focus on Ukraine, while stressing Sudan's sovereign right to host bases if it chooses.
Coverage Differences
Narrative/Attribution
Dabanga Radio (Other) reports analysts’ views that the story is exaggerated and politically motivated, with Major General Dr Mutasim Abdelqader saying the matter was revived to ‘provoke a negative US reaction’ and denying any actual offer. The Eastleigh Voice (Local Western) focuses more on an official freeze and the contradiction with a Wall Street Journal report, rather than the analysts’ interpretation that the story is a provocation or distraction.
Media responses to freeze
The two sources differ in tone and implied stakes.
The Eastleigh Voice treats the freeze as a sober, factual update that raises geopolitical concerns, noting Washington was worried about a growing Russian foothold and strategic control over Red Sea ports.
Dabanga's coverage is more dismissive of the headlines and critical of domestic leaders for engaging in such talk amid widespread suffering.
Dabanga frames the stories as a distraction from the 'real crisis' and quotes commentators saying the government's pursuit of talks is misplaced during war.
Coverage Differences
Tone/Narrative
The Eastleigh Voice (Local Western) emphasises geopolitical implications and external concern — noting Washington’s alarm at a potential Russian foothold — whereas Dabanga Radio (Other) frames the coverage as a distraction and criticises domestic leaders, quoting political commentator El Daw saying such talk ‘amuses people briefly’ and describes the pursuit of talks as misplaced while the country is at war.
Base proposal: conflicting reports
Both sources portray the base proposal as effectively stalled, though they differ in framing and implications.
Eastleigh Voice highlights an official freeze and international strategic concerns.
Dabanga stresses scepticism, denies any concrete offer, and argues that such headlines distract from Sudan's humanitarian catastrophe.
The limited reporting leaves key questions unresolved, notably the exact content and origin of the Wall Street Journal report and whether any formal agreements were signed, and both sources underscore this ambiguity.
Coverage Differences
Missed information / Ambiguity
Both sources agree the plan is stalled, but neither provides definitive documentation of a signed agreement; Eastleigh Voice reports an official freeze and references a Wall Street Journal claim without reproducing its evidence, while Dabanga relays analysts’ denials and scepticism that an offer was ever made. The result is consistent coverage on the halt, but unresolved ambiguity about the underlying documents or deals.