The imposition of targeted sanctions by the United Nations Security Council against key Rapid Support Forces (RSF) commanders – Tijani Ibrahim Moussa Mohamed, Gedo Hamdan Ahmed, Al-Fateh Abdullah Idris, and Abdul Rahim Hamdan Dagalo – represents a significant, albeit incremental, escalation in the international community’s response to the protracted conflict in Sudan. This development underscores the growing recognition that accountability for atrocities and the maintenance of a fragile security environment are inextricably linked to the broader goal of regional stability. The continued violence, displacement, and humanitarian crisis within Sudan demand decisive action, and the Council’s decision, while symbolic, highlights the potential for further restrictive measures if warring factions fail to adhere to international law.
The situation in Sudan has spiraled into a complex and devastating civil war, largely fueled by the power struggle between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), commanded by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti). The conflict, initially sparked in April 2023 in the capital, Khartoum, quickly spread to the Darfur region, a focal point of decades-long ethnic and political tensions. The root causes of the conflict are multifaceted, including historical grievances stemming from the 2019 military coup, the legacy of the Janjaweed militias’ atrocities in Darfur, and the unequal distribution of wealth and power within Sudan. The ongoing fighting has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, displaced millions, and created a dire humanitarian crisis, compounded by a severe lack of access for aid organizations.
## Historical Context: Darfur and the RSF
Understanding the current sanctions regime necessitates a look back at the establishment of UNSCR 1592 in 2014. This resolution targeted individuals and entities involved in the conflict in Darfur, primarily focusing on the Janjaweed militias, who were implicated in widespread human rights abuses – including mass killings, rape, and displacement – during the early years of the conflict. The sanctions aimed to exert pressure on the Sudanese government to disarm the Janjaweed and bring perpetrators to justice. The designation of key RSF commanders, initially in 2024, demonstrated a shift towards broadening the scope of sanctions to encompass the broader forces involved in the current conflict. The RSF emerged as a dominant force in the 2021 coup, and their involvement in the recent fighting in El Fasher, North Darfur, has intensified the humanitarian crisis and further destabilized the region. The strategic importance of Darfur, rich in oil reserves and possessing a complex ethnic landscape, has drawn regional and international attention.
The implementation of sanctions, involving the freezing of assets and travel bans, is intended to disrupt the financial resources of the targeted individuals and exert diplomatic pressure. However, the effectiveness of sanctions is often debated, particularly in complex conflicts like Sudan where enforcement mechanisms and the willingness of financial institutions to comply can be limited. “Sanctions are most effective when coupled with political engagement and a clear commitment to accountability,” explains Dr. Aisha Mahmoud, a Senior Research Fellow at the International Crisis Group specializing in Sudan. “Simply imposing sanctions without a broader strategy for resolution and justice will ultimately prove insufficient.”
## Stakeholders and Motivations
Several key stakeholders are driving the conflict and shaping the international response. The SAF, backed by elements of the Sudanese National Congress, seeks to maintain its dominance and consolidate power. Hemedti and the RSF, while initially emerging from the military, have built a powerful private militia network, controlling significant economic assets and regional influence. The United States, through its Department of State, has been a consistent critic of the Sudanese government and the RSF, advocating for a negotiated settlement and supporting humanitarian efforts. The European Union has adopted a similar approach, imposing sanctions and providing aid. Russia, through the Wagner Group, maintains a significant presence in Sudan, ostensibly providing security support to the SAF, further complicating the geopolitical landscape.
According to a recent report by the Institute for the Study of War, “the RSF maintains a significant advantage in terms of manpower and weaponry, benefiting from external support, primarily from Egypt and the UAE.” This asymmetry of power has contributed to the RSF's ability to advance in El Fasher, displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians and exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. The United Nations, through its peacekeeping mission (UNIFAM), is struggling to provide effective protection to civilians and deliver humanitarian aid amidst the ongoing fighting.
## Recent Developments and Future Outlook
Over the past six months, the fighting has intensified in El Fasher, the last remaining stronghold of the RSF. The offensive, triggered by a targeted raid on the Wali (Governor’s) office, has seen heavy casualties on both sides and a dramatic increase in civilian displacement. Satellite imagery released by the Conflict Armament Research (CAR) indicates a substantial deployment of RSF forces and the use of heavy weaponry. Furthermore, reports suggest a growing influx of foreign fighters, bolstering the RSF's ranks. "The situation on the ground is deteriorating rapidly,” stated a senior UN official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “The lack of access for humanitarian organizations is particularly concerning, and the risk of a full-scale collapse of the humanitarian system is increasing daily.”
Looking ahead, the next six months are likely to be marked by continued violence and displacement. The imposition of additional sanctions, potentially targeting other RSF commanders and financiers, is a plausible outcome. However, a negotiated settlement appears increasingly distant, hampered by deep-seated mistrust and the divergent objectives of the warring factions. Longer-term, the conflict could lead to the fragmentation of Sudan into warring regions, creating a protracted state of instability with significant implications for regional security and international relations. The potential for wider regional spillover, including involvement of neighboring countries, remains a serious concern.
The escalating sanctions against RSF commanders represent a critical, albeit incremental, step towards holding those responsible for atrocities accountable. However, the fate of Sudan hangs in the balance, demanding a holistic and sustained international effort that prioritizes humanitarian needs, facilitates a negotiated settlement, and ultimately ensures justice and stability for the Sudanese people. The question remains: will the international community demonstrate the sustained political will and strategic coherence required to genuinely address the root causes of this devastating conflict, or will the ongoing violence continue to consume Sudan and destabilize the wider region?