The U.S. State Department’s stance on the conflict in Sudan has become more assertive, according to comments made to Digital. The city of El Fasher in Darfur has been under siege for 500 days, trapping hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Sudan is experiencing the world’s largest displacement crisis, with 13 to 15 million people displaced and an estimated 150,000 killed since fighting began in April 2023 between the rebel Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the Sudanese government’s military. The civil war stems from tensions following the 2019 removal of President Omar al-Bashir.
An Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan reported to the U.N.’s Human Rights Council last Friday that the RSF has committed numerous crimes against humanity during the siege of El Fasher and surrounding areas. These crimes include murder, torture, enslavement, rape, sexual slavery, sexual violence, forced displacement, and persecution based on ethnicity, gender, and political affiliation.
The report corroborated accounts that the RSF is using starvation as a weapon of war against the residents of El Fasher, stating that “The RSF and its allies used starvation as a method of warfare.”
U.N. Secretary-General’s spokesperson, Stéphane Dujarric, stated on Aug. 29 that aid is being blocked from entering El Fasher. “Supplies are pre-positioned nearby but efforts by the and its partners to move them into El Fasher continue to be hampered.”
Mariam Wahba, a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Digital that “The situation in El Fasher remains dire.” She added, “The RSF has effectively encircled the city, cutting off key supply routes and subjecting civilians to indiscriminate shelling. Satellite images indicate a wall is being built to trap civilians inside, consistent with RSF tactics used elsewhere. These ‘kill zones’ leave residents with no means of escape. El-Fasher is the last major SAF-held city in Darfur. If it falls, the RSF would control nearly all of Darfur, consolidating both territory and economic assets, particularly lucrative gold mines.”
President Donald Trump’s Special Advisor for Africa met with Sudan’s army chief, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, in Switzerland last month. The State Department’s responses to Digital’s questions on Sudan this week suggest little progress has been made towards peace.
A spokesperson stated that “since the April 2023 outbreak of conflict in Sudan, we have witnessed significant backsliding in Sudan’s overall respect for fundamental freedoms, including religious freedom.”
“In order to safeguard U.S. interests, to include the protection of religious freedom in Sudan, U.S. efforts seek to limit negative Islamist influence in Sudan’s government and curtail Iran’s regional activities that have contributed to regional destabilization, conflict, and civilian suffering.”
Wahba also expressed concern about the involvement of foreign “bad actors” in Sudan. “Iran has provided the SAF with drones and technical support. Emerging reports point to Iranian interest in helicopter facilities. sees its involvement in Sudan as a gateway for extending its footprint in Africa.”
Wahba continued, “Russia has played both sides of the conflict. It has pursued a naval base on Sudan’s Red Sea coast, which would give Moscow direct access to critical shipping lanes, while also profiting from gold smuggling through RSF-linked networks.”
“Regional powers are also advancing their own interests. Egypt has publicly backed the SAF, aligning with Sudan’s ruler, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. Saudi Arabia is aligned with Egypt in backing al-Burhan. The United Arab Emirates, on the other hand, has provided significant support to the RSF, viewing its commander, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo – widely known as Hemedti – as the custodian of Sudan’s gold exports and the path to its plans for port development along the Red Sea coast.”
Wahba concluded, “Burhan’s willingness to engage with Washington is a potential opening. This does not mean the U.S. should unconditionally back the SAF, but it could form the basis for a more defined U.S. strategy, one that makes U.S. engagement contingent on the SAF reining in, or removing, its Islamist militias and leadership.”
“`