UN warns foreign weapons, drones fuelling civilian deaths in Sudan

The number of civilian casualties in Sudan continues to rise as the use of warplanes and attack drones expands, amid international warnings that the flow of foreign weapons and military technology to the Sudanese army and its allied forces is contributing to the continuation of military operations and the escalation of violations.

Human rights and UN reports reveal that airstrikes have become one of the most prominent threats to civilians after attacks spread to markets, residential neighborhoods and vital facilities across large areas of Darfur, Kordofan and Blue Nile.

The escalation comes as the Sudanese army continues to receive foreign military equipment, particularly Turkish and Iranian drones, alongside the political and military support it receives from regional powers, foremost among them Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

In the latest UN investigation into the Sudanese war, the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan revealed that drone strikes killed more than 1,000 people during the first five months of 2026.

The report, issued last September, warned that foreign weapons, military technology and external support networks had become key factors in sustaining the war, which is witnessing grave violations of international humanitarian law.

Investigations indicate widespread use of drones in operations that have resulted in civilian casualties, while the Sudanese army’s reliance on advanced aerial systems has raised growing concerns over strikes targeting populated areas.

Human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, have documented airstrikes carried out by the Sudanese army against civilian areas in Darfur, including the city of Nyala, amid allegations that weapons failing to distinguish between military and civilian targets were used.

The city of El Fasher stands as one of the most prominent testaments to the humanitarian tragedy left by the war. After a prolonged siege, the Rapid Support Forces seized control of the city in October 2025.

More recently, the city has come under near-daily aerial bombardment targeting markets, residential neighborhoods and facilities, with the Sudanese army at times using barrel bombs dropped indiscriminately from military transport aircraft.

The fighting in Darfur has coincided with an escalation in the use of warplanes and drones across multiple parts of the region, as human rights organizations have documented strikes carried out by the Sudanese army that hit populated areas.

Other parts of Sudan have also witnessed air attacks involving conventional warplanes and drones, amid allegations that unguided munitions were used in civilian areas.

These attacks raise concerns over compliance with international humanitarian law, which prohibits targeting civilians and civilian objects and requires parties to a conflict to take the necessary precautions to avoid causing disproportionate harm to civilians.

Calls are growing for independent investigations into the airstrikes, including determining the types of munitions used and the parties responsible for ordering and carrying them out.

The violations are taking place as the Sudanese army continues to obtain advanced military systems from foreign sources. International reports have revealed the army’s use of Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones, alongside Iranian Mohajer-6 drones, while other reports have spoken of the arrival of more advanced Turkish systems.

Egypt also figures among the countries maintaining close military ties with the Sudanese army leadership, after Reuters revealed last February that Akıncı drones had been deployed near the Sudanese border.

As for Saudi Arabia, it continues to provide financial and military support to the army leadership, although media reports said it had backed away from financing a $1.5 billion Pakistani arms deal intended for Sudanese forces.

These relationships raise questions over the extent to which external support affects the Sudanese army’s ability to continue its air operations, particularly as reports of civilian casualties from airstrikes continue to mount.

The military landscape is becoming increasingly complex with the participation of irregular armed formations alongside the Sudanese army, including the al-Baraa ibn Malik Brigades and groups linked to Sudan’s Islamist movement.

Some of these formations face allegations of committing violations against civilians, while the nature of their links to the military establishment raises questions over military command responsibility for the operations they carry out.

Human rights advocates warn that the proliferation of armed militias and the multiplication of command centers increase the incidence of violations and complicate efforts to establish responsibility and hold perpetrators accountable.

The continued provision of military support to the army, without sufficient oversight of the entities receiving weapons and equipment, also raises concerns that some of these resources could pass into the hands of extremist armed formations.

The impact of the war has not been confined to residential areas but has extended to humanitarian supply routes and convoys carrying food and medicine.

On October 7, reports said that a driver was killed in a strike targeting trucks belonging to the World Food Programme in South Kordofan, despite the vehicles carrying markings indicating their humanitarian nature.

Other areas have also witnessed attacks on civilian facilities and residential neighborhoods, while ethnic violations continue in Khartoum and areas under the control of the Sudanese army.

These developments come as millions of Sudanese suffer from food insecurity, forced displacement and the collapse of basic services.

Humanitarian organizations warn that continued attacks on supply routes threaten to deprive entire communities of essential assistance needed for survival.

The escalating violations in Sudan are placing arms networks and foreign military support under mounting legal and ethical scrutiny.

As civilians continue to be killed in airstrikes, calls are growing for international investigations that go beyond identifying those directly responsible for the attacks and also examine the parties providing the weapons and military technology used in them, where evidence exists of their contribution to violations.

International humanitarian law emphasizes the need to distinguish between military and civilian targets and prohibits indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, regardless of the party carrying them out or the entity providing it with support.

As the war continues, there is an increasing need for more effective international measures to prevent weapons from reaching entities where there are serious grounds to believe they will use them to commit grave violations.

The continued flow of weapons into Sudan, without effective oversight and accountability, not only threatens to prolong the war but also increases the likelihood of further civilian deaths and of new cities becoming arenas of destruction and displacement.