The 80th United Nations General Assembly wrapped up in New York on September 29, 2025, drawing more than 120 world leaders and heads of state to its iconic podium. As is tradition, the week was packed with passionate speeches on the world’s most urgent issues—climate change, inequality, the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and the ever-tense Russia-Ukraine conflict. But while global leaders, including prominent African voices, addressed these pressing subjects with vigor and empathy, analysts and observers couldn’t help but notice a glaring omission: the silence surrounding some of Africa’s own most devastating conflicts.
Among the African leaders who spoke were Nigerian Vice President Kassim Shettima, Senegalese President Bassirou Faye, and Namibian President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah. Their speeches, according to the Associated Press, were passionate and clear in their condemnation of Israel’s ongoing attacks on Gaza. Shettima, in particular, delivered a stirring plea: “The people of Palestine are not collateral damage in a civilization that is searching for order. They are human beings, equal in worth, entitled to the same freedoms and dignities that the rest of us take for granted.” These words, echoing throughout the Assembly, underscored a shared sense of global responsibility and empathy for those suffering under siege.
Yet, for all the attention given to crises abroad, two of Africa’s most complex and destructive conflicts—those in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo—barely registered more than a passing mention. This wasn’t lost on experts. Chris Ogunmodede, an Africa affairs analyst with deep experience in African diplomacy, remarked, “African countries have sort of stepped back to some extent in terms of wanting to place African issues at the forefront of the U.N. agenda. On the most important dates on the U.N. calendar, there is nothing to say about African issues in any substantive way.”
The omission is particularly striking given the scale of human suffering involved. Sudan’s war, which erupted in mid-2023 when a powerful paramilitary group launched a full-scale assault on the nation’s armed forces, has become the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. The conflict has effectively split the country in two and left at least 40,000 people dead. The Sudanese army, after a bitter struggle, regained control of the capital, pushing the Rapid Support Forces primarily into the troubled Darfur region. But the violence continues to escalate. Just earlier this month, a drone strike killed at least 70 people in the besieged city of El-Fasher, a grim reminder of the ongoing devastation.
The United Nations has accused both sides in Sudan’s conflict of committing mass atrocities and has warned that famine looms in several regions, as both the army and the paramilitary have blocked food and aid distribution. The suffering is compounded by the fact that humanitarian organizations face severe restrictions, making it nearly impossible to deliver life-saving assistance to those most in need.
Meanwhile, in the eastern region of Congo, violence has also reached a fever pitch. In January 2025, the M23 rebel group—backed by neighboring Rwanda—launched a series of attacks that quickly overran key cities. The toll has been staggering: roughly 7,000 people killed, millions more displaced or trapped in cities now under rebel control. According to the United Nations, more than 100 armed groups are fighting for dominance in eastern Congo, a region rich in minerals but impoverished by decades of conflict. While a peace deal was reached between Congo and the M23 group through a Doha initiative, actual peace remains elusive—fighting continues, and civilians bear the brunt.
“The cursory mentions of DR Congo and Sudan were a missed opportunity by African leaders to really highlight how pronounced the humanitarian crises have become,” said Beverly Ochieng, a senior security analyst at Control Risks. The lack of attention, she and others argue, reflects not just a diplomatic oversight but a deeper malaise within African multilateral institutions themselves.
“We are seeing the reality of the limitations of African institutions and states, the limitations of their own ability to pursue their own international affairs,” Ogunmodede noted. In practice, this means that the most significant negotiations and peace initiatives are being led not by African organizations, but by outside powers. On the sidelines of the UN Assembly last week, diplomatic leaders from the United States, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt intensified their efforts to broker peace in Sudan. A Washington-led peace deal between Congo and Rwanda is reportedly in the works and expected to be signed in the coming weeks.
The involvement of external actors brings its own complications. The Sudanese armed forces, for instance, filed a case at the UN’s top court in March, accusing the UAE of arming their adversaries and violating the genocide convention. The UAE has denied these allegations, but the dispute highlights the tangled web of interests and alliances that now define both conflicts. Rwanda’s support for the M23 group in Congo, for example, has drawn in neighboring countries like Burundi and Uganda, turning a regional crisis into a broader geopolitical contest.
“The outside interests have leverage, and that compels armed actors to deal with peace mechanisms coming from outside,” Ochieng explained. “With African institutions, they do not have as much leverage institutionally or being able to provide additional incentives for peace and security initiatives.” In other words, when it comes to brokering peace or even getting warring parties to the table, it’s often outsiders who hold the cards.
For many observers, the contrast between the passionate advocacy for global issues and the muted response to homegrown crises is both frustrating and telling. While African leaders have shown they can speak eloquently about injustice and suffering elsewhere, their reticence to address Sudan and Congo at the UN’s biggest stage has left some wondering whether African voices are being sidelined—or if they are sidelining themselves.
Of course, the 80th UN General Assembly was never going to solve every crisis in a week. But as the world’s attention shifts from New York back to the ground realities in Sudan, Congo, and beyond, the hope remains that future gatherings will not just echo the world’s pain, but also amplify the voices of those suffering closest to home.