Cabover Pete ✊🏿🟥⬛️🟩 ☝️🏽 🪂🔻

#NOTOLANA | HOW SUDAN WAS SILENCED BY THE UAE'S CANDIDATE FOR UN SECRETARY-GENERAL As Emirati diplomat Lana Nusseibeh campaigns to become the next UN Secretary-General, international human rights organisations and activists are mobilising against her bid. While public opposition often focuses on the UAE’s sponsorship of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a militia that the UN has accused of g*nocide in Sudan, Nusseibeh’s personal role remains a central concern. Human Rights Watch (HRW) have accused her of whitewashing the UAE’s abuses, citing Nusseibeh's “disinformation about the UAE’s rights record particularly her dismissal of the UN’s own reports documenting the UAE’s links to the RSF”. Nonetheless, there is less focus on the direct role Nusseibeh played in silencing Sudan. When the UAE-backed RSF waged war on Sudan in April 2023, Nusseibeh was the UAE’s ambassador to the UN. At the time, the UAE had eight months left to its non-permanent membership of the UN Security Council. According to PassBlue, a woman-led outlet covering the UN, the UAE utilised its power to keep Sudan off the agenda, deploying direct diplomatic pressure, formal complaints, and threats to prevent open or private Council discussions. Nusseibeh's defence of Abu Dhabi did not stop after her tenure as the UAE's ambassador to the UN ended. Following RSF massacres in the western Sudanese city of Al-Fashir in October 2025 that the UN subsequently determined bore the hallmarks of g*nocide, Nusseibeh reportedly played a key role in a lobbying blitz that resulted in a European parliament resolution condemning the atrocities failing to mention the UAE. As a result, the prospect of Nusseibeh leading the UN is considered a threat to the institution as a whole. HRW call on UN member states to ask tough questions about Nusseibeh’s willingness “to defend the independence and integrity of the UN and its investigative mechanisms, including those exposing UAE abuses”. There is an ongoing campaign against Nusseibeh’s candidacy for UN Secretary-General organised under #NoToLana, which can be found on www.notolana(dot)com

A Thread 👇🏿 Emirati diplomat Lana Nusseibeh, currently campaigning to become the next UN Secretary-General, has been widely criticised on social media after claiming that resolving the crisis in Sudan would be a top priority under her leadership. In comments to Politico's NatSec Daily, Nusseibeh responded to allegations that the UAE supports the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a militia the UN says perpetrated g*nocide in Sudan, saying "the atrocities committed by the RSF must be subject to accountability, and [I] would support the work of UN fact-finding mechanisms". However, her statement was denounced by human rights experts and Sudanese commentators. "This is not actually a response to the accusation that the UAE is arming the RSF, but a swerve that refuses even to name or accept the UAE as a hypothetical target of investigation. In that regard Nusseibeh is acting simply as a UAE representative, not a neutral party," responded Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik. "The absolute worst thing that could happen...would be for a UN Secretary General to issue performative calls for justice and accountability...all the while ignoring the war's enablers," argued former US diplomat Cameron Hudson. Others challenged Nusseibeh’s willingness to subject her own government to the accountability mechanisms she claims to champion. "Should RSF backers be held accountable as well?" asked Claudio Francavilla of Human Rights Watch. "YOU cannot preach accountability while shielding your own government from scrutiny. Will the UAE release its arms export records and allow UN investigators to examine its role in arming the RSF militia?" asked activist Samah Al-Badri. Adding to the sentiment, commentator @kushiticgyal remarked that there were "lots of words and still no clear condemnation of the UAE’s role...[I] doubt that will change if you [become UN Secretary-General]". Concluding the widespread sentiment among critics, Ahmed Elmadani added: "Indeed Sudan would be the priority for you, but in a way that washes the bloody hands of your criminal country, the UAE."

The UAE''s candidate for UN Secretary-General, Lana Nusseibeh, placed fourth in the Security Council’s eighth uncoloured straw poll, in a sign of growing opposition to Abu Dhabi's foreign policy. "Few want an apologist for the UAE's role sending arms and mercenaries to the g*nocidal Rapid Support Forces in Sudan [at the helm of the UN]" noted former Human Rights Watch director Kenneth Roth. The vote coincided with a New York Times report that UN investigators found evidence the UAE funded Colombian mercenaries to support the RSF, a militia the UN says perpetrated g*nocide in Sudan. The article described Nusseibeh as having “led Emirati efforts to deny her country’s role in Sudan.” Costa Rica’s Rebeca Grynspan widened her lead, securing 12 "encourage" votes and three "discourage" votes, representing the highest tally for any contender to date. All 15 members of the Council were given identical ballots which did not distinguish between permanent veto-bearing members of the UN Security Counncil (P5) and the other ten members. This means it is unclear where these votes are coming from. Despite Grynspan's dominant lead, previous colour-coded balloting indicated two of her "discourage" votes originated from P5 members. This has prompted speculation that Western P5 nations - the US, UK and France - could use their veto power against Grynspan to clear a path for Nusseibeh. However, Nusseibeh faces resistance. The Security Council has signaled a clear preference for candidates from Latin America and the Caribbean, honouring the informal regional rotation system. Mark Leon Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of UN Dispatches, projects that the Council will now opt for colour-coded ballots. "At that point, we will get a clearer picture of where Grynspan’s opposition is coming from. And soon thereafter, we should learn whether any P5 members are firmly opposed to her candidacy," he stated.