In a previous article, I drew attention to the inadequacy of the international community's response so far to the war of aggression waged by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and their external sponsors against the Sudanese people and state. In this article, I would like to explain how international law provides a solid basis for a peaceful resolution of this crisis.
The right of a State to defend itself and its citizens is a basic principle of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. For States, self-defence is not merely a privilege but a duty: they have an obligation to safeguard their sovereignty and the well-being of their people.
However, today, states are often forced to defend themselves not from other states, but from non-state actors, such as terrorist groups, criminal organisations and militias. The RSF militia currently waging war against the Sudanese state is one such non-state actor.
International law is clear about a state’s rights and responsibilities in the event of a conflict, whether the conflict is against another state or a non-state actor. However, institutions charged with enforcing international law often inadvertently undermine state sovereignty when they respond to a conflict between a state and a non-state actor, such as the one in Sudan. They do so by granting non-state actors the same legitimacy as states and their institutions, and by politicizing their approach to issues related to justice, human rights, and humanitarian law.
The latest report of the UN Human Rights Council Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan is a case in point. It documents unprecedented atrocities and grave violations of international humanitarian law committed by the RSF militias, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, sexual violence, slavery and child recruitment. Yet the Mission, in defiance of logic and justice, is calling for an arms embargo not only on the RSFs, but also on the Sudanese Armed Forces, the national army defending the people of Sudan against the savage militias. In other words, the Mission is calling for the Sudanese state to be deprived of its most fundamental right and responsibility: self-defence against a ferocious enemy that threatens its sovereignty.
Violence and atrocities
The RSF militia shares important traits with the world’s most extremist and dangerous non-state actors. It follows an extremist ideology, carries out lethal cross-border operations, and employs indiscriminate brutality, harming defenseless women and children. While the militia’s ethnic and gender-based violence is well documented, less attention has been paid to its other problematic traits.
Like some of the deadliest armed groups the international community has had to deal with in recent years, the RSF militias’ extreme violence stems from an ideology of racial supremacy. The militia seeks to create an exclusive homeland on Sudanese territory for the Arab tribes of Darfur and the Sahel. To achieve this, the militia expels local populations from fertile regions such as Darfur, Kordofan, Al-Gezira and Sennar, and establishes Arab nomads in their place.
Racist extremism
Recently, several international media outlets have highlighted the dangers of this project. Well-known Sudanese writer Osman Mirghani, former deputy editor of the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, among others, has warned in several articles and press reports about the far-reaching consequences of this plan. Earlier this month, a joint investigation by Sky News, Lighthouse Reports, The Washington Post and Le Monde exposed the RSF’s systematic efforts to ethnically cleanse large areas of Darfur. A video released as part of the investigation showed RSF militiamen and allied Arab fighters chanting “victory to the Arabs” while surrounded by the bloodied bodies of civilian victims of their latest massacre.
Meanwhile, social media is awash with videos of young Sahelian Arabs celebrating the RSF's perceived military successes in Darfur and other regions, with prominent figures from these communities publicly praising the militia's “rising leader.” Hemedti (Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo).
As noted Horn of Africa expert Alex de Waal noted at the start of the conflict, “the RSF is now a private transnational mercenary company” capable of turning Sudan into a subsidiary of this company if left unchecked. The militia itself has become heavily dependent on support from mercenaries and Arab tribesmen after suffering significant losses to the Sudanese army.
International response and accountability
The international community, which has in the past confronted similar armed groups with strength and determination, has largely underestimated the threat that the Sudanese Defense Forces (formerly known as Janjaweed) pose to Sudan, the region, and global stability. Indeed, some state and non-state actors continue to provide military support to the militias, allowing them to perpetrate acts of violence against the people of Sudan with impunity.
The RSF are no longer a threat only to Sudan, but to the entire international community and as such demand a unified and principled response.
Criminals do not voluntarily submit to the law. States impose it on them to protect themselves. Today, some scholars describe the international order as “anarchic” due to the absence of a globally recognized supreme authority. However, there are still mechanisms and tools that help states protect their citizens and impose law and order on rogue actors. These mechanisms include international law, the UN, and similar regional organizations. They may not be perfect, but without them we risk descending into anarchy.
Values versus political convenience
It is worrying to see that many nations prioritize their narrow national interests over universal values when it comes to condemning crimes against civilians and preventing the recruitment of mercenaries. This selective approach erodes the foundations of international justice and human rights. The world must not ignore the suffering of the Sudanese people for the sake of political expediency or economic gain. Finding a path to lasting peace in Sudan requires a new approach to dealing with the RSF. The international community must take action not only through vocal condemnation but also through concrete measures that hold the militia’s leaders, financiers and sponsors to account. Cutting off the supply of weapons and mercenaries to the militia must be given priority.
Furthermore, the international community must support Sudan in establishing a comprehensive peace process, including promoting dialogue among all stakeholders, strengthening state institutions, and fostering respect for human rights and the rule of law. The Sudanese people deserve a future free of violence and oppression, which can only be achieved through a genuine commitment to peace and justice. It is time for the world to stand with the Sudanese people and hold those who commit atrocities accountable. Only through a united and principled effort can lasting peace and stability be achieved in Sudan. The future of the country depends on our collective determination to uphold justice, human rights, and the rule of law.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.
