OPINION: The illusion of enemies and humanitarian crisis in Sudan

Sudan’s humanitarian crisis continues to spiral, with the latest UN figures indicating that nearly 30 million people face starvation, while 15 million have been displaced from their homes. 

Yet, military and ruling authorities persist in waging war, diverting attention from what is now the world’s most severe humanitarian catastrophe and the daily atrocities committed against civilians. 

Instead, they manufacture external conflicts, conjuring imaginary enemies and stoking tensions with neighboring countries, all while escalating violence, prolonging the war, and deepening human rights violations across the nation.

Amid reports documenting the Sudanese army’s execution of dozens of civilians in Khartoum, the army’s deputy commander, Yasser Al-Atta, launched verbal attacks on Chad and South Sudan, accusing them of supporting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). 

His threats escalated to the point of warning that Sudan would target their airports—widely interpreted as an attempt to distract the international community from the military’s extensive human rights violations.

The war, ignited by the military’s coup against the civilian government, has become a convenient smokescreen, deflecting local, regional, and global scrutiny from the army’s crimes, including indiscriminate airstrikes and extrajudicial killings. 

These violations are being meticulously documented by rights organizations across Sudan.

This strategy is not new. Since the onset of the civil war, Sudan’s military has perpetuated the narrative of foreign conspiracies, using it to rally domestic support and justify continued bloodshed. 

Yet, the Sudanese public remains largely unmoved by such tactics, with persistent calls for an end to the conflict.

A Pattern of False Allegations

Al-Atta’s recent remarks are not an isolated case but part of the military’s broader “imaginary enemies” strategy. Similar allegations had previously been made by Sudan’s Foreign Ministry and officials in the military-led government in Port Sudan, targeting several Arab nations alongside Chad, South Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, and the Central African Republic. 

The objective is clear: to divert both local and international attention from the war’s realities.

However, these nations have not remained silent. Chad’s Foreign Ministry swiftly responded to Al-Atta’s statements with a strongly worded press release, condemning them as a potential declaration of war if acted upon. Chad reaffirmed its right to defend its sovereignty under international law and emphasized that Sudan’s internal conflict is the sole responsibility of its warring factions.

Similarly, South Sudan’s Foreign Ministry denounced Al-Atta’s threats, in which he vowed to target so-called “traitors” inside South Sudan. The ministry described his comments as reckless and provocative, warning that they violate the principles of good neighborliness, peaceful coexistence, and international law.

Masking Atrocities

The Sudanese military’s escalating confrontations with neighboring countries have conveniently provided cover for its intensifying human rights abuses. 

The latest massacre took place in Turrah, North Darfur, where an aerial bombardment killed and wounded hundreds of civilians. Reports also suggest the army has used chemical weapons against the population.

In response, the Tassies Coalition called on the international community to take urgent action in documenting these crimes and prosecuting the perpetrators through international legal mechanisms. The coalition warned that continued silence would only reinforce a culture of impunity.

The coalition further accused the military of pursuing a deliberate strategy to dismantle Sudan’s social fabric through systematic ethnic cleansing. It urged political and civil forces to unite in confronting what it described as “blood-soaked terrorism.”

Meanwhile, Sudanese activists have circulated videos showing field executions carried out by the army in the Burri district of eastern Khartoum. The victims were reportedly targeted based on their ethnic backgrounds, with a focus on those from western Sudan.

The Emergency Lawyers human rights group confirmed that these executions were not confined to Burri but also occurred in several other areas, including Jireif West, Al-Sahafa, Mayo, Al-Azhari, and Al-Kalaklat. The group accused army-aligned activists of leading coordinated disinformation campaigns to justify and conceal these crimes.

It also highlighted that accusations of collaboration with the RSF are being used as a pretext for these extrajudicial killings—an egregious violation of national and international laws that threatens Sudan’s social fabric and fuels hate speech and violence.

The report emphasized that these acts constitute war crimes under international law and, given their systematic nature and increasing frequency, could amount to crimes against humanity.

Similar executions had previously taken place in Bahri, Wad Madani, and Um Rawaba, including the brutal killing of a 70-year-old teacher.

On January 31, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed deep concern over the rise in extrajudicial killings, attributing them to militias aligned with the Sudanese army following its takeover of Khartoum Bahri.

One widely shared video showed army personnel from the Al-Baraa bin Malik Brigade reading out a list of names, responding with “Zayil” (eliminated) after each name—a chilling indication of their execution. Numerous other videos have surfaced showing summary executions, extrajudicial killings, and arbitrary arrests of civilians across the city.

The UN Commissioner concluded his statement by calling for an immediate end to these crimes and for independent investigations in line with international standards, stressing that killing must never become normalized in Sudan.

A Strategy of Deflection

Observers warn that the military’s repeated accusations against neighboring and Arab nations—alleging their support for the RSF—are calculated attempts to deflect attention from its systematic crimes against civilians.

Despite the RSF’s willingness to engage in peace talks and negotiations, the army has categorically rejected these efforts, opting instead for military escalation to block any path toward a political resolution or the formation of a civilian-led government.

It is worth noting that the RSF initially resisted the military coup against the civilian government and had agreed to integrate its forces into the national army—on the condition that a civilian government be reinstated and the military return to its barracks. 

The army’s rejection of this proposal ultimately led to its brutal crackdown across Sudan.