Nairobi | April 15, 2026
Two years into one of the world’s most devastating conflicts, Sudan is experiencing a humanitarian catastrophe that aid agencies describe as the worst since Rwanda — and yet international attention has largely drifted elsewhere, overshadowed by simultaneous crises in Gaza, Ukraine, and the Sahel.
The war, which erupted in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has killed tens of thousands of people, displaced more than 12 million others, and pushed sections of the country into famine. The capital, Khartoum, has been reduced to a battleground. Darfur, scene of a genocide two decades ago, is once again experiencing mass atrocities on a horrifying scale.
The Berlin Conference: A Timely but Insufficient Response
In a bid to re-energise international engagement, Germany hosted a major conference on Sudan in March 2026, bringing together representatives from African Union institutions, the Arab League, the European Union, the United States, and the United Nations. The stated goal was to forge a unified international approach to halting the violence and unlocking humanitarian access.
The conference produced commitments — more funding for the UN’s humanitarian response plan, renewed calls for a ceasefire, and diplomatic engagement with both warring parties. But critics were quick to note the gap between the scale of the crisis and the response it generated.
“The conference was important symbolically, but the commitments made are nowhere near what is needed on the ground,” said one senior UN official who attended but was not authorised to speak publicly. “We are asking for $4 billion for humanitarian operations; we got a fraction of that in new pledges.”
The War’s Root Causes Run Deep
Understanding Sudan’s war requires going beyond the immediate confrontation. The conflict is rooted in a power struggle between two men — General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, who leads the SAF, and General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (known as Hemedti), who commands the RSF. Both generals were architects of the 2019 uprising that toppled Omar al-Bashir, and both participated in the transitional government that followed — before turning on each other when it came time to stand aside for civilian rule.
The RSF, originally formed from Janjaweed militias that terrorised Darfur in the 2000s, has grown into a powerful parallel army with significant economic interests, particularly in gold mining. The SAF, meanwhile, retains institutional control of the state apparatus and much of the regular military.
The war has taken on a distinctly ethnic character in Darfur, where the RSF and allied Arab militias have targeted non-Arab communities in what the United States and other governments have formally designated as ethnic cleansing.
Famine Confirmed in Parts of Sudan
The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification partnership declared famine in parts of Darfur in late 2024, a designation that should have triggered a massive international response. Instead, the delivery of aid has been systematically obstructed by both warring parties, who use humanitarian access as a bargaining chip in their military calculations.
More than 24 million Sudanese are facing acute food insecurity. Children account for a disproportionate share of those dying from malnutrition and preventable disease.
The Regional Dimension
Sudan’s war is not unfolding in isolation. Libya’s conflict has long provided a smuggling route for RSF-acquired weapons. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Iran have all been cited in diplomatic cables and intelligence assessments as having provided support to various actors, reflecting the conflict’s status as a proxy battleground for Gulf and regional rivalries.
Egypt, Sudan’s southern neighbour, shares a long border and is watching the conflict closely, concerned about spillover and the potential for mass refugee flows. Chad, already absorbing waves of displacement from Darfur, faces a permanent humanitarian emergency on its eastern border.
What Comes Next
The international consensus — such as it is — remains that a political settlement is the only durable solution. But ceasefire negotiations have repeatedly collapsed, and neither party shows signs of military exhaustion that would compel compromise. The African Union’s efforts to mediate have been hampered by internal divisions; some member states maintain close ties with one or the other warring faction.
Meanwhile, Sudan’s civilians continue to pay the price. Aid workers operating in conflict zones face regular attacks, looting, and bureaucratic obstruction. The UN’s World Food Programme has repeatedly warned that it cannot reach millions of people without guarantees that have not been forthcoming.
Sudan’s war is, by any measure, a generational catastrophe. The question the international community must answer — and has yet to adequately answer — is whether it is prepared to act accordingly.
UN humanitarian officials are calling for immediate and unconditional access to all areas of Sudan affected by the conflict.