China is reportedly leveraging Sudan's devastating civil war to secure long-term resource deals with the country's military-led government, even as Beijing publicly calls for peace, according to an analysis published in The Diplomat. The report, authored by Paul Mwirigi, a Kenya-based writer, argues that China's engagement with General Burhan's Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) — which controls the eastern half of Sudan — goes well beyond diplomatic friendship and reflects a calculated strategy of economic entrenchment.

The Deals Behind the Diplomacy

At the centre of the analysis is a reported $300 million copper deal between China and Sudan's SAF-controlled government, under which Sudan would retain only 30 per cent of profits over a 30-year timeframe — and only after outstanding debts to China are cleared. Notably, Sudan currently owes China over $5 billion in unpaid debt. The terms, according to the article, 'hint at a different picture than economic cooperation.'

This comes amid a broader pattern: China has previously struck multiple oil deals with Khartoum and is now reportedly pivoting to other mineral resources as Western nations have largely withdrawn from Sudan following the outbreak of civil war roughly three years ago.

Sudan's Debt Crisis and the Dependency Trap

The SAF-controlled de facto government is carrying a staggering debt burden of over $56 billion, according to the report. With almost no creditors willing to finance the SAF's campaign against the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in the west, China remains one of the few actors still engaging Sudan's military leadership at an economic level.

The Diplomat article argues that Beijing's strategy is deliberately sequenced: offering small gestures of debt relief to build trust, then locking in 'extractivist' long-term deals under conditions where the weakened regime has little bargaining power. 'China is sequencing its debt, offering small tokens of grace through debt forgiveness and then locking in longer-term and fully extractivist deals,' the article states.

Beijing's Formal Neutrality as Political Cover

China's public posture of neutrality in the Sudan conflict, critics argue, provides it political cover to deepen economic ties without attracting the scrutiny that direct military involvement would invite. The Diplomat analysis contends that this neutrality 'essentially sets up a violation of Sudan's long-term sovereignty,' creating a dependency relationship that could outlast the conflict itself.

The report also highlights that China's interests are structurally tied to General Burhan remaining in power, since the legitimacy of these contracts rests on personal relationships with his leadership. A future civilian government, the article notes, would likely seek to renegotiate or void Chinese arrangements.

Eastern Sudan's Warning

The Eastern Sudan Advisory Council and the Beja Congress have called for a freeze on all deal-making with China. Eastern Sudan is described as mineral-rich but chronically poor, with residents reportedly receiving little benefit from the resource wealth being contracted away. The region faces water shortages, crumbling infrastructure, and international isolation, compounded by the ongoing civil war.

The Diplomat article warns that the legal exposure from agreements concluded under wartime conditions extends beyond Sudan's borders, with affected communities reaching into South Sudan and neighbouring territories. Western policymakers, the report argues, are 'entirely missing what China is actually doing in Sudan.'

What Comes Next

The situation in Sudan remains fluid, with no ceasefire in sight between the SAF and RSF. As the conflict drags on, analysts warn that deals struck now could bind post-war Sudan to unfavourable terms for decades. Whether international bodies or a future civilian government can challenge these arrangements remains an open question.