Sudan has become the newest front in Iran's long war against the West and Israel — and Washington cannot afford to keep pretending otherwise. While diplomats speak of ceasefires and "inclusive transitions," Tehran is laying the groundwork for something far more dangerous: a military beachhead on the Red Sea, operated through its newest ally in Khartoum, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan.
The Biden Administration and even parts of the Trump foreign policy establishment have described al-Burhan as a "pragmatic" leader, a man who might guide Sudan toward stability. Nothing could be further from the truth. Al-Burhan is a military officer from the old Islamist regime of Omar al-Bashir, a longtime partner of the Muslim Brotherhood and a beneficiary of Iran's renewed military outreach. He is not a bulwark against extremism; he is its new façade.
On September 12, the "Quad" — the United States, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt — issued a clear warning: the Muslim Brotherhood must have no role in Sudan's future. The statement also demanded that the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) end their assault on civilians and hand authority to a civilian transitional government. Al-Burhan's answer was unmistakable: escalation. Within days, his forces resumed bombardments in Omdurman and tightened their grip on Port Sudan. His refusal to implement a ceasefire is not an act of sovereignty; it is the deliberate defiance of an Islamist general who knows he enjoys Iran's political and logistical support.
Iran sees in Sudan what it once saw in Yemen: a strategic entry point. Having lost freedom of maneuver along its traditional corridor — Syria and Lebanon — Tehran is searching for a new flank against Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East. The Red Sea, with its shipping lanes and proximity to the Israeli port of Eilat, is that flank. By arming and advising al-Burhan's army, Iran gains exactly what it needs: a launchpad for drones, a logistics hub for militias, and a symbolic victory that extends the "Axis of Resistance" from the Levant to the Horn of Africa.
This is not theoretical. Intelligence sources and open-source imagery have already confirmed the transfer of Iranian drones and air-defense systems to the Sudanese Armed Forces. Iranian advisers have been sighted in military zones once controlled by the Rapid Support Forces, a rival to the SAF. The operational logic is clear: build an Iranian-aligned Islamist army on the western shore of the Red Sea to threaten Israel from the south, menace Saudi shipping, and target U.S. naval assets stationed nearby.
For Israel, the stakes are immediate. The Red Sea is a lifeline for its trade and naval security. An Iran-friendly Sudan gives Tehran a direct maritime route to Israel's southern border, bypassing the more heavily monitored Persian Gulf. Missiles, drones, and weapons can be smuggled through Port Sudan and across the desert corridors toward the Sinai Peninsula — the same networks once used by Hamas before Egypt's crackdown. The nightmare scenario is not abstract: Iran-backed strikes against Eilat or against U.S. installations in Djibouti or the Gulf of Aden.
The danger is compounded by the ideological dimension. Al-Burhan's army is no longer a secular institution; it has become a hybrid of professional officers, Islamist militias, and remnants of the Muslim Brotherhood's armed wings. Reports from Khartoum indicate that clerics close to the Muslim Brotherhood now serve as military chaplains and propagandists within the SAF. For Iran, this is an ideal partner: a Sunni Islamist army that can be co-opted into the broader anti-Western, anti-Israeli alliance without formal Shiite conversion or theological friction.
The cost of inaction will be immense. If Washington continues to treat al-Burhan as a legitimate interlocutor, it will hand Tehran the Red Sea without firing a shot. The same pattern that turned Yemen into a launchpad for Houthi missiles and naval aggression could repeat itself along Sudan's 700-mile coastline. U.S. Navy vessels could find themselves under persistent drone harassment, while Israel faces a southern front manned by Islamist proxies.
There is still a narrow window to prevent this outcome — but only if the United States acts with clarity. The first step is to demand al-Burhan's resignation and condition all engagement, aid, and recognition on his immediate departure. Negotiations cannot succeed while the very man aligned with Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood controls the Sudanese state. The United States should back the formation of a technocratic, civilian-led interim government under international supervision, with explicit oversight of the army and security sector.
Second, Washington must work with the Quad partners to block Iranian weapons routes into Sudan. Intelligence cooperation between the U.S., Israel, Egypt, and the UAE is essential. The Red Sea corridor must be patrolled, monitored, and defended. A joint maritime task force — modeled after the anti-piracy operations off Somalia — could ensure that Iranian shipments do not reach Port Sudan.
Third, the U.S. should restore deterrence through policy, not platitudes. Sanctions targeting al-Burhan's generals, Iranian intermediaries, and Muslim Brotherhood financiers would send an unmistakable message: Sudan's army will either return to its barracks or face isolation.
Finally, Washington must reaffirm that America stands with Israel and with the peoples of the region who reject Islamist tyranny. The Muslim Brotherhood has destabilized every nation it has touched — from Egypt to Libya to Tunisia. Allowing its resurrection inside Sudan's military would undo years of counterterrorism progress and put both American and Israeli lives at risk.
Sudan's tragedy is that its people want freedom while their generals want power and their foreign patrons want leverage. The United States can help break this triangle by removing its keystone: al-Burhan himself. His departure would open the door to a civilian transition, deny Iran its new bridgehead, and show that Washington has finally learned the lesson of past appeasement — that there can be no partnership with those who arm themselves against civilization.
America once led the free world in confronting such threats. It can do so again — by recognizing Sudan not as a diplomatic inconvenience but as the next front in a war already declared by Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, and their allies. If the U.S. and its partners fail to act, the Red Sea may soon host more than trade routes. It may host the next war against the West.
Robert Williams is based in the United States.
