The Journal6 September 2026
When the United Nations corrects the map of Africa… who corrects the map of Sudan?
By Dar al-Salam Wadaah
The journal is DAR's own voice — her argument, signed and dated. Positions taken in the name of DAR Talks are published as statements
On 4 September 2026, the UN General Assembly took a historic step by adopting the resolution “Correct the Map”, aimed at addressing historical distortions in the representation of the sizes of continents, foremost among them the distortion resulting from the widespread use of the Mercator projection.
The resolution received broad support, in a step that brought back to the fore a question much larger than mere cartographic technique:
Who has the right to draw the world's image? And who determines how the world sees Africa?
We in Sudan welcome every effort aimed at correcting the cartographic injustice inflicted upon Africa. But at the very same moment, we pose a more urgent question:
If we are correcting the map of Africa… who corrects the map of Sudan?
In the wake of the vote on the resolution, some international media coverage featured maps showing Halaib and Shalateen within Egyptian territory.
Here we are not talking about a simple error in colour or official borders on the margin of an image.
We are talking about Sudanese land that has remained under Egyptian control by force, and about a matter of sovereignty, borders, and historical and legal rights that Sudan has not renounced.
Hence the question becomes legitimate:
Where did this map come from?
Who prepared it?
Who reviewed its borders?
Who chose it to accompany an international event of this magnitude?
And was this map part of the official UN materials, or was it prepared by a media outlet, or obtained from a news agency or a specialised mapping company?
The map is not just an image
Maps have long been treated as neutral tools.
But history says otherwise.
A map does not only determine the location of mountains, rivers, and cities; it also shapes people's perception of countries, borders, and who owns the land.
That is why the “Correct the Map” project itself carries a political and epistemological significance that goes beyond the matter of geometric projections.
If old maps wronged Africa by visually reducing its size, then the question that imposes itself is:
Can we correct Africa's size, while leaving other maps to correct Sudan's history in favour of another country?
Cartographic correction cannot be selective.
Halaib and Shalateen are Sudanese
It is important to be clear here. Halaib and Shalateen are Sudanese.
This is not a new or incidental position in Sudanese discourse, but rather a position rooted in history, documents, and the official Sudanese stance.
As for the ongoing Egyptian control over the area, this should not — through its repetition in maps — transform into a legal reality or international recognition.
There is a fundamental difference between:
Who actually controls the land
And:
Who legally and historically owns it.
A map that confuses the two does not become more accurate merely because it is repeated in international media.
Who owns the map?
Here the real issue begins.
If international outlets used a map showing Halaib and Shalateen within Egypt, then the Sudanese public has the right to know:
What is the source of this map?
Is it a UN map?
If so, who approved it and on what basis?
Is it a map from a news agency?
Then who prepared it?
Is it from a commercial mapping company?
Then what database does it rely on?
Was it prepared within the media institution itself?
Then who reviewed it?
And did the institution know that the area is part of Sudanese territory claimed by Khartoum?
These are not marginal questions.
They are the essence of journalistic professionalism and international transparency.
And what about Egyptian influence?
At this moment, we do not have evidence proving that the Egyptian government directly paid any media outlet to use this map.
Therefore, we will not accuse anyone of what we cannot prove.
But that does not prevent us from asking a deeper question:
Could Egyptian political, media, and advertising influence have played a role in entrenching a certain image of Sudan's map in international media?
This is a legitimate question, especially when it comes to a sensitive border and sovereignty issue.
States do not exercise their external influence only through diplomatic statements.
There is also public relations, advertising, media partnerships, research centres, news agencies, mapping companies, and content produced or provided by governmental and semi-governmental entities.
For this reason, what is required is not a preemptive accusation.
What is required is transparency. If there was no interference or influence, then let the source of the map be clear.
If the map was merely a professional error, then let it be corrected.
But if there is a political or governmental source behind it, then the public has the right to know.
Why now?
Because the timing of this map's appearance cannot be ignored.
We are faced with a UN resolution bearing a highly significant name:
Correct the Map.
And at almost the same moment, Sudanese people see a map showing part of their land within the borders of another country.
It may be a coincidence.
It may be a recurring cartographic error.
It may be reliance on an old international database.
It may have an undisclosed source behind it.
But whatever the reason:
We must know.
We do not ask the world to adopt the Sudanese narrative
We do not ask the international media or the United Nations to draw borders according to the wishes of Sudanese people.
Nor do we ask international journalism to settle the issue of Halaib and Shalateen through an article or an image.
We ask for something simpler:
If the map represents a legal position, let its sources be mentioned.
And if it does not represent a legal position, then it should not be presented to millions as a definitive border reality.
To the United Nations
We welcome the correction of the cartographic representation of Africa.
But we demand at the same time that this correction be comprehensive and fair.
It cannot be that the goal is to remove a geographical distortion about the size of the continent, while allowing a political distortion concerning the territory of an African state to be entrenched.
Halaib and Shalateen are not a geographical detail.
They are Sudanese land.
Any map showing them within Egypt requires a clear explanation of its source and basis.
If the UN used this map, it must clarify that.
If the map is not UN-produced, then the media institutions that published it must disclose its source.
And to the international media: our question is simple
To every media institution that used that map, or one like it:
Where did you get it?
Who drew it?
Who reviewed it?
What is its date?
And what is the source of the border data you relied upon?
Were you aware that Halaib and Shalateen are part of the territory claimed by Sudan and that Egypt controls it?
These questions do not represent pressure on journalism.
They are the public's right to know the source of the information presented to them as fact.
We do not want control to turn into sovereignty on paper
The most dangerous thing that can happen is not that a newspaper uses a wrong map once.
The most dangerous thing is that the map is repeated.
Then a news agency transmits it.
Then an international institution uses it.
Then it enters books, curricula, and digital databases.
Then, years later, it becomes “the truth everyone knows.”
That is why silence now is not a wise choice.
Not because we have evidence of a conspiracy.
But because we do not want to discover years later that an error that could have been corrected in one day has become a “cartographic fact” that is difficult to change.
Correct the map fully
If the world is serious about correcting maps, let it start from the same principle:
No distortion of Africa.
No distortion of its history.
No distortion of its countries' borders.
No conversion of military control into sovereignty through repetition on maps.
We do not demand a privilege for Sudan.
We demand accuracy.
We demand transparency.
We demand that the world know the source of the maps it uses.
And we demand that maps not become silent tools for rewriting history and borders.
For Halaib and Shalateen are Sudanese.
And the question we pose today is not: “Whom do we believe?”
Rather:
Who drew the map?
Who chose it?
And why?
And who benefits from the world seeing it this way?
These questions deserve an answer.
Halaib and Shalateen are Sudanese.
Stopping the war is an absolute necessity.
https://dar-talks.com/en/journal/who-corrects-the-map-of-sudan/Available in:ENFRع