Sudan Denies Ethiopia's Accusations Over Support for Tigray Fighters

In a sharply worded response broadcast in the latest Africanews video, Sudan’s military officials dismissed Ethiopia’s allegation that Khartoum is providing material support to armed groups battling government forces in the north. The Sudanese side labelled the claim as “baseless,” underscoring the deepening diplomatic tension between the two neighbours as they each navigate complex security challenges across the Horn of Africa. The exchange, captured on 28 September 2026, reflects a broader pattern of mutual suspicion that has been simmering since the outbreak of conflict in Ethiopia’s Tigray region and the subsequent spill‑over effects on Sudan’s own volatile northern frontiers.

Context of the Accusation

The Ethiopian government has long warned that external actors are meddling in the Tigray conflict, a war that began in 2020 and has since drawn in a range of regional militias and foreign interests. In recent weeks, Ethiopian officials have asserted that Sudan is among the states covertly aiding forces aligned with the Tigray People's Liberation Front, or TPLF, in their fight against the Ethiopian federal army. The claim is part of a broader narrative that Ethiopia is seeking to rally regional partners against what it perceives as hostile interference.

Sudan’s military response, as presented in the Africanews footage, rejects this narrative outright. By calling the accusation “baseless,” Khartoum is not only defending its own national reputation but also signaling a refusal to be drawn into Ethiopia’s internal disputes. The language used mirrors diplomatic phrasing commonly heard at the African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), where states often contest each other's security narratives while preserving a veneer of regional solidarity.

Both countries share a porous border that has historically been a conduit for trade, migration, and, at times, armed movement. In recent years, the border region has witnessed a rise in cross‑border raids and the movement of armed groups seeking refuge or logistical support. The accusation therefore touches on a sensitive security dynamic that could have ramifications for broader regional stability, especially as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) watches developments with concern.

Sudan’s Official Stance

In the video report, Sudanese military spokespeople emphasized that there is no evidence of any material assistance flowing from Khartoum to Tigray forces. The term “baseless” was used repeatedly, underscoring the confidence with which the Sudanese side rejects the allegation. This rhetoric aligns with Sudan’s broader diplomatic approach, which has lately focused on securing its own internal reconciliation processes after years of civil war and transitional governance.

Sudan’s denial also serves a strategic purpose. By distancing itself from the Tigray conflict, Khartoum aims to avoid antagonising Ethiopia, a key partner in regional security initiatives such as the African Union’s peace and security architecture. Maintaining a cooperative relationship with Ethiopia is crucial for Sudan, especially as it seeks assistance in stabilising its own northern provinces, where armed groups have occasionally taken advantage of the power vacuum left by the ousting of former regimes.

The Sudanese military’s response also reflects a pattern observed in other regional disputes, where states are quick to deny any involvement in the internal affairs of neighbours. This diplomatic posture is often reinforced in AU summits, where member states are reminded of the principle of non‑interference, a cornerstone of the continent’s diplomatic ethos.

Ethiopia’s Perspective and Motivations

Ethiopia’s claim that Sudan is backing Tigray forces is rooted in a broader suspicion of external actors influencing the outcome of the conflict. Since the war’s inception, Addis Ababa has accused several neighbouring states of providing logistical support to the TPLF, a narrative that serves to delegitimize the Tigray opposition and rally domestic and regional support for the federal army’s campaign.

The Ethiopian government’s assertion in this instance may also be driven by a desire to pressure Sudan into curbing any perceived tolerance of armed groups operating along their shared border. By publicly naming Sudan, Addis signals that it is monitoring cross‑border activities closely, a stance that could be reinforced in future discussions at the African Union’s Peace and Security Council.

Moreover, Ethiopia’s diplomatic outreach often intertwines with cultural and economic ties, such as participation in regional festivals like the Pan‑African Film Festival and the African Arts Biennial, where political messaging can be subtly reinforced through cultural channels. By framing Sudan as a potential backer of Tigray forces, Ethiopia can leverage its cultural diplomacy to shape narratives across the continent.

Implications for Regional Security

The exchange between Sudan and Ethiopia adds another layer of complexity to an already intricate security environment in the Horn of Africa. Both nations are grappling with internal insurgencies, border insecurity, and the challenge of integrating displaced populations. A deterioration in their bilateral relationship could hamper joint security operations that have been coordinated under the auspices of the African Union and IGAD.

Furthermore, the accusation and denial could influence the calculus of other regional actors, such as Eritrea and South Sudan, who monitor the situation closely. Any perception that Sudan is involved in the Tigray conflict might prompt these states to reassess their own border policies and security collaborations, potentially leading to a cascade of diplomatic protests or defensive posturing.

From a broader perspective, the dispute highlights the fragility of regional mechanisms designed to manage cross‑border threats. While the AU’s Peace and Security Council provides a forum for dialogue, the effectiveness of its resolutions often depends on the willingness of member states to accept external scrutiny. The Sudan‑Ethiopia spat underscores the limits of such mechanisms when national pride and sovereignty concerns dominate the discourse.

Historical Echoes and Cultural Ties

Sudan and Ethiopia share a long history of cultural exchange, from the ancient trade routes that linked the Nubian kingdoms to the Ethiopian highlands, to contemporary collaborations in music and film. Senegal, where Global1.News is based, often celebrates such inter‑African connections through festivals like FESPACO and the Pan‑African Film Festival, which showcase stories of resilience across the continent.

These cultural bonds, however, coexist with periods of tension, as seen in past border disputes and competing interests over the Nile waters. The current diplomatic friction over alleged support for Tigray forces can be viewed as a modern manifestation of historic rivalries, now amplified by the immediacy of media coverage and the rapid spread of information through platforms like Africanews.

In Senegalese cultural memory, the rhythms of mbalax and the storytelling tradition remind us that African societies have long navigated the balance between cooperation and competition. The Sudan‑Ethiopia disagreement is a contemporary chapter in that ongoing narrative, illustrating how political disagreements can ripple through the cultural fabric of the continent.

Looking Ahead: Prospects for Dialogue

While the video report captures a moment of sharp rebuttal, the path forward may involve diplomatic engagement behind the scenes. The African Union, which convenes regular high‑level meetings of heads of state, could serve as a venue for Sudan and Ethiopia to address the accusations in a more measured setting. Past AU summits have facilitated dialogue on contentious issues, from the Darfur crisis to the Sahel security challenges.

In addition, regional bodies such as IGAD, which focuses on peace and development in the Horn of Africa, might mediate confidence‑building measures. These could include joint border patrols, information sharing on armed group movements, and collaborative humanitarian initiatives to assist displaced populations affected by the conflict in Tigray and northern Sudan.

Ultimately, the resolution of this dispute will hinge on the willingness of both governments to separate domestic security concerns from broader regional stability goals. As African journalists, we watch with a keen eye on how such diplomatic exchanges unfold, mindful that the continent’s future rests on the ability of its peoples and leaders to turn contention into constructive cooperation.

By Amara Diop, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: africanews video report (28 September 2026); africanews; Global1.News