What is the best way not to find a truce in a military conflict? Deciding not to participate in peace negotiations, for instance. This is exactly what the Sudanese chief of the army chose to do (or not to do) lately, while the Sudanese population is dragged in a deadly conflict which has been lasting for sixteen months.Abdel Fattah Abdelrahman Al-Bourhane, who has been ruling the army and the country over the last few years, claimed on August 24 that he would not go to Geneva (Switzerland) for the peace talks. Instead, the Sudanese leader is ready to “fight for a hundred years”.On August 14, the United States initiated the negotiations in Switzerland to make humanitarian access easier in Sudan and try to set up a cease fire. The Sudanese army does not want to participate in the peace talks, and their opponents, the RSF (Rapid Support Forces), are the only ones to take part to the discussions. The Sudanese power does not agree with the way the negotiations are being held, and thus decided it was better not to participate, no matter the emergency for the local populations undermined by the war.No agreement was found on a cease fire, but some progress was made on the humanitarian subject. The humanitarian workers involved in Sudan should be able to work in safer conditions, with a secured access to main roads and a possibility to help locals without (too many) risks.According to the United Nations, that conflict caused the death of tens of thousands of people, most of them being civilians asking for nothing but peace. On top of that, more than ten million people were forced to move and leave the country. And in the meantime, their chief still wishes to “fight for a hundred years