Sudan's government has a new proposal to end the country's civil war and move toward civilian rule. Malik Agar Ayyir, deputy chairman of Sudan's transitional leadership, announced the plan on July 8, 2026, according to Al Jazeera. The core idea: disband armed groups and give the government the sole power to control weapons and law enforcement, which are then followed by steps toward democratic elections.

Who is Agar, and why does it matter that he's proposing this? He is a former rebel commander—he once led armed groups fighting against the government. Now he sits on Sudan's governing council. That background gives him credibility with different sides of the conflict, but it also means everyone will wonder: is he really trying to help, or serving his own interests?

The proposal addresses four big unresolved questions: what happens to Sudan's military, how to end the fighting with the Rapid Support Forces (the RSF, a powerful armed group), whether outside countries should be involved, and what kind of government Sudan should have. Here's the key strategic move: Agar separates talks with the RSF from the broader political discussions. Instead of trying to solve everything at once—military conflicts and political reform together—his plan handles them separately.

The proposal draws on Sudan's 2020 Juba peace agreement, the last time armed groups successfully joined a government. That deal brought Agar himself into power. His new plan treats the current war the same way—as something to be resolved by bringing fighting groups into the political system.

Why now? Sudan has been fighting since April 2023, when the government military and the RSF started a war that killed thousands and forced 14 million people from their homes. This is described by aid organizations as the world's worst ongoing humanitarian crisis right now. Every attempt to negotiate peace has failed.

Previous peace efforts collapsed for similar reasons. In 2025, Sudan's government said the RSF had to leave certain regions before talks could happen—the RSF said no. The United States, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt proposed a three-month ceasefire and talks in November 2025. Sudan's government rejected it, claiming the UAE was secretly helping the RSF. In December 2025, another plan emerged, this one focused on giving power back to Sudan's civilians instead of military groups.

Agar's proposal addresses an uncomfortable reality: outside countries—especially the UAE, which Sudanese officials accuse of funding and arming the RSF—have shaped this conflict. The UAE denies this. When Sudan's government rejected the international peace plan months earlier, they cited the same concern. If any peace talks are going to work, both sides will need to deal with this question of foreign support.

Sudan has tried "national dialogue" before, with mixed results. In 2013, the former president announced a dialogue that didn't lead anywhere. Recently, in July 2024, Sudan's political factions met in Cairo but couldn't agree on a joint statement. Agar was one of the leaders who refused to sign. The fact that he is now writing his own peace proposal—rather than joining someone else's—is notable.

Agar has been meeting with regional leaders. He met Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni in February 2026, continuing a pattern of Sudan's government engaging with neighboring countries. Egypt, in particular, has consistently pushed for dialogue over fighting.

What makes this proposal different is not what it says but how it says it and who is proposing it. By splitting military negotiations from political talks, Agar avoids the trap that caught earlier peace plans. Both previous attempts tried to handle the military conflict and political reforms in one negotiation, which made them harder to achieve. Whether Sudan's fighting groups and the civilians agree to Agar's two-track approach, and whether outside powers take seriously his framing about foreign interference, will determine if this becomes just another failed peace attempt or something that actually works.