UN Leadership Race: UAE Candidate Draws Protests From Sudanese Diaspora

TVS News AI, editorially supervised, presents UN Leadership Race: UAE Candidate Draws Protests From Sudanese Diaspora.

The nomination came last week and set a succession process in motion again that, according to the Guardian, had previously stalled. The UAE wants to bring Lana Nusseibeh to the top of the United Nations as its first female leader. She was the UAE’s permanent representative to the UN until 2024 and continues to hold a ministerial position in her government.

The controversy surrounding her candidacy does not begin with a general personnel question. The Sudanese diaspora and international human rights observers are questioning the Emirati diplomat over her position on Sudan. They accuse her of rejecting reports of UAE support for the RSF, even though human rights groups have documented evidence of that connection for years.

The Allegations Extend to the Attack on El Fasher

The candidacy will be judged against the war in Sudan.

According to the Guardian, the criticism is directed explicitly at Nusseibeh’s denial. Human rights groups and other organizations have documented evidence of UAE support for the RSF for years. The RSF is accused of committing atrocities in the war against the Sudanese army. These include an attack on the city of El Fasher in October 2025, in which the UN identified signs of genocide.

Sudanese pro-democracy and women’s rights activist Hala al-Karib, regional director of the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa, said Nusseibeh had “no track record showing that she acts independently of her country’s role in Sudan.” Support from the Security Council would essentially mean denying the genocidal acts committed by the RSF in El Fasher.

The precise nature of the allegation is important: The critics are not objecting merely to a nomination by the UAE. They complain that Nusseibeh has repeatedly repeated the UAE’s blanket denials. In their view, her nomination therefore raises the question of whether the office of Secretary-General would be led by a government representative who has publicly opposed the documented connections between her country and the RSF.

The Words at the Briefing Sound Much Harder

A virtual Avaaz briefing on Tuesday brought the criticism together.

Ibrahim Alduma, who grew up in El Fasher and is a co-founder of the human rights organization Sudan Action Hub, said on Tuesday at the virtual briefing by the human rights initiative Avaaz that Nusseibeh’s success would cause people to lose faith in the UN. He asked how people on the ground could explain to the United Nations that it was not an obstacle to the rights of the Sudanese population. His concern therefore extended beyond Sudan to other victims of war and international crimes who rely on the UN to deliver justice.

Husam Mahjoub, a Sudanese advocate and co-founder of the independent outlet Sudan Bukra TV, said electing a senior UAE diplomat as Secretary-General would place the UN institutions under the leadership of the “principal defender” of that government — precisely when Sudanese civilians needed the UN most to hold powerful states accountable.

Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, also joined the criticism. Nusseibeh had been questioned about allegations of UAE arms supplies and support for the RSF, he said, and denied the connection regardless of the facts. Such a stance would make her unsuitable for the office of UN Secretary-General.

On Wednesday, Bruno Stagno Ugarte, Advocacy Officer at Human Rights Watch, criticized Nusseibeh’s rejection of UN reports concerning the links between the UAE and the RSF. He said this had seriously undermined justice and accountability for the victims.

Nusseibeh Places Independence and Investigation at the Center

Her own statement is markedly less compromising than the UAE’s handling of the allegations.

In a statement on Tuesday, Nusseibeh said she would support the work of UN fact-finding missions on accountability and transitional justice in Sudan as Secretary-General. She described the RSF’s crimes as “atrocious.” At the same time, she said she had taken a leave of absence from her ministerial position in the UAE government to run for the UN post in order to respect the office’s “independence duties.” She called the “terrible conflict in Sudan” a test of a successor secretary-general’s success.

This is the strongest counterargument to the criticism: Nusseibeh is promising no concealment and is explicitly calling for investigation, transitional justice and accountability. Her statement does not, however, resolve the allegations against the UAE. The activists specifically doubt that a senior Emirati diplomat who has repeatedly repeated her country’s denials will act independently enough in this conflict.

Kate Ferguson, co-founder and co-executive director of the charitable organization Protection Approaches, said at the same briefing that, to the best of her knowledge, there was insufficient evidence that the candidate would act independently of her country of origin. She described it as an “autocratic takeover” of a multilateral institution and warned against hiding behind a facade of naive ignorance.

Nine Votes and Five Possible Vetoes Will Decide the Election

The nominated candidate has not yet cleared the hurdle.

To become UN Secretary-General, a candidate needs at least 9 affirmative votes from the 15 members of the Security Council. In addition, none of the five permanent members may cast a veto. The permanent members are the United States, United Kingdom, China, France and Russia.

In an informal Security Council straw poll earlier this month, former Costa Rican vice-president Rebeca Grynspan narrowly led. However, she and all the other candidates received two or more votes against them from the permanent council members. The next informal “straw poll” could take place as early as Friday. The format and exact timing were still being negotiated by diplomats at that point.

Nusseibeh’s candidacy is therefore not only a signal to the Sudanese diaspora. It also changes the starting conditions in a vote in which every candidate has so far received at least two votes against them from among the permanent members. The nomination has created a new public debate about her suitability. Whether it changes the consensus required in the Security Council cannot yet be established from the available information.