THE WORLD, CONNECTED
DIRECTIONAL RELATIONSHIP · 2026

United States → Sudan

This score represents United States's relationship toward Sudan. The reverse direction is calculated separately and shown alongside it.

USA → SDN-14Competitive71% evidence confidenceBroad sourced evidence
SDN → USA-14CompetitiveSymmetric current scores
SIX-COMPONENT MODEL

Current component scores

Component values run from −100 to +100 and are combined with the published weights.

Security0

No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.

Why this score?

The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.

Coverage gap: The reviewed official record does not establish a frozen bilateral security rule or mutual-defence obligation.

Diplomacy-30

2 documented factors produce the -30 diplomacy assessment.

Why this score?
  1. -15Serious unresolved political friction
    Baseline rule · 2015

    The official record documents substantial and continuing political disagreements between the United States and Sudan.

  2. -15Civil war and accountability sanctions deepen deterioration
    Active event · 2023

    War between the Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces, followed by U.S. accountability measures, further constrained ordinary bilateral relations.

Economic-15

1 documented factor produce the -15 economic assessment.

Why this score?
  1. -15Civil war and accountability sanctions deepen deterioration
    Active event · 2023

    War between the Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces, followed by U.S. accountability measures, further constrained ordinary bilateral relations.

Coverage gap: 2015 reporter-side trade remained below the frozen threshold or was unavailable, and no qualifying standing bilateral economic institution was evidenced.

Alignment-30

3 documented factors produce the -30 alignment assessment.

Why this score?
  1. +10Cooperation on consequential multilateral issues
    Baseline rule · 2015

    The official record documents sustained U.S.–Sudan cooperation across several regional or global policy areas.

  2. -30United Nations voting alignment
    Baseline rule · 2015

    A rolling three-year comparison of UN General Assembly votes activates the alignment threshold.

  3. -10Civil war and accountability sanctions deepen deterioration
    Active event · 2023

    War between the Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces, followed by U.S. accountability measures, further constrained ordinary bilateral relations.

Disputes0

No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.

Why this score?

The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.

Coverage gap: The reviewed record does not establish an active bilateral territorial claim or a qualifying settled-order rule.

Societal0

No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.

Why this score?

The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.

Coverage gap: The reviewed record does not establish a national-scale people-to-people exchange meeting the frozen societal threshold.

CHANGE SINCE 2015

-6 in 2015 → -14 in 2026

The change is generated from sourced events and frozen scoring rules, not retrospective editorial adjustment.

ACTIVE EVIDENCE

Events affecting the current score

-7

Civil war and accountability sanctions deepen deterioration

War between the Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces, followed by U.S. accountability measures, further constrained ordinary bilateral relations.

Interpret with care

This analytical score is not an objective fact, endorsement or prediction. Confidence reflects evidence coverage, while incomplete or unavailable observations remain explicit. Differences below 5 points are treated as practical ties rather than a meaningful ranking.

Explore the full timeline and sources in the atlas →