The sanctions, announced on December 12th, specifically target Abdul Rahim Hamdan Dagalo, Gedo Hamdan Ahmed, Al-Fateh Abdullah Idris, and Tijani Ibrahim Moussa Mohamed – individuals demonstrably linked to widespread human rights violations. The targeting of Hamdan Dagalo, the brother of RSF leader General Hemedti, underscores the UK’s determination to disrupt the leadership structure of a force responsible for systematic abuses. “The atrocities taking place in Sudan are so horrific they scar the conscience of the world,” stated Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper. “Today’s sanctions against RSF commanders strike directly at those with blood on their hands, while our strengthened aid package will deliver lifesaving support to those suffering.” The UK’s approach reflects a belief that legal and economic pressure can complement diplomatic efforts and incentivize a shift in behavior.
The sanctions themselves are not novel; asset freezes and travel bans are standard tools in international counter-terrorism and human rights enforcement. However, their application within the context of the Sudanese conflict represents a powerful signal. According to a recent report by the International Crisis Group, “The use of sanctions as a tool to influence the warring parties in Sudan remains a contentious and arguably insufficient strategy. The RSF operates with relative impunity, and the sanctions have yet to demonstrably alter its operational dynamics.”
Complementing the sanctions is a substantial increase in humanitarian assistance. A further £21 million package is being deployed to provide food, clean water, health services, and protection for women and children in El Fasher and surrounding areas, reaching approximately 150,000 people. This commitment, alongside an overall humanitarian aid package of £146 million this year, demonstrates a tangible commitment to alleviating immediate suffering. “We are providing technical support to international justice and accountability mechanisms,” stated a spokesperson for the . “This year we also invested £1.5 million in the Sudan Witness Project to monitor, verify and document human rights violations including attacks on civilians.” The UK’s support acknowledges the scale of the humanitarian crisis – an estimated 30 million people in need and 12 million displaced – and recognizes the vulnerability of civilians caught in the crossfire.
The strategic significance extends beyond immediate humanitarian concerns. The UK’s actions align with international consensus, driven largely by the UN Human Rights Council’s adoption of a UK-led resolution last month, which secured an urgent inquiry into atrocities in El Fasher. This demonstrates a growing coalition of states recognizing the need for accountability and the failure of previous diplomatic efforts to achieve a ceasefire. “The use of sanctions as a tool to influence the warring parties in Sudan remains a contentious and arguably insufficient strategy,” notes Dr. Fatima Hassan, Senior Analyst at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). “However, the sanctions, coupled with the humanitarian response, represent a crucial step in maintaining international pressure and demonstrating a refusal to accept impunity.”
Looking ahead, the UK’s response faces several challenges. The RSF’s control over significant areas of El Fasher, including the vital logistical hub of the Wadi Fatika bridge, continues to hamper humanitarian access. The situation remains highly volatile, with ongoing clashes between the RSF and SAF, and the potential for further escalation. Furthermore, the effectiveness of sanctions is often debated, with critics arguing that they primarily punish the general population while failing to significantly disrupt the actions of armed groups.
In the short-term (next 6 months), the UK will likely continue to pressure the warring parties through diplomatic channels and maintain its sanctions regime. Increased surveillance of RSF activities and exploration of further sanctions against key figures are anticipated. In the longer-term (5-10 years), the UK’s actions could play a role in shaping the post-conflict landscape in Sudan, contributing to the establishment of a more accountable and stable governance structure. However, the ultimate success hinges on the willingness of the warring parties to engage in meaningful negotiations and the international community’s continued commitment to supporting a sustainable peace.
The situation in Sudan highlights the limitations of coercive diplomacy and the urgent need for a comprehensive approach that combines legal and economic pressure with robust humanitarian assistance and sustained diplomatic engagement. The conflict underscores the fragility of international norms and the continued relevance of targeted sanctions as a tool of statecraft, although their efficacy must be continually reassessed.