The war in Sudan is currently classified as one of the fiercest and bloodiest conflicts in Africa. It is no longer merely a war between the Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese army; regional rivalry has been evident throughout the crisis that erupted in mid-April 2023.
The conflict has produced one of the world's largest humanitarian crises, while the International Organization for Migration has warned that emergency relief supplies allocated for Sudan through the organization's "Common Humanitarian Corridor" are close to running out.
According to UN estimates, more than 14 million people have been forced to flee their homes, while, despite this, all international mediation efforts undertaken to end the conflict that has killed tens of thousands of civilians have faded away.
Meanwhile, the US State Department said that neither the Sudanese army nor the Rapid Support Forces, nor the leadership of either side, represents a legitimate and constitutional authority to govern Sudan, considering both sides to be ruling through the force of arms.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Department spokesman Tommy Pigott added that neither side had demonstrated a serious commitment to an immediate ceasefire, but had instead escalated combat operations and drone strikes that have killed civilians.
Meanwhile, the issue of chemical weapons use remains one of the most neglected files on the international community's agenda regarding the war in Sudan, at a time when the United States confirmed, early in 2025, their use by the army and imposed sanctions on Sudan as a result.
The United Nations has expressed its readiness to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use in Sudan if granted an official mandate to conduct a fact-finding mission.
UN Secretary-General's spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said: "No one should use chemical weapons," warning against a repetition of atrocities witnessed by the world in the past.
The UN spokesperson also affirmed the United Nations' support for efforts aimed at halting the external supplies fueling the war and expanding the parties' combat capabilities, while civilians bear the greatest cost.
Field Evidence
Since 2025, local and international investigations have revealed evidence of chemical weapons use by the army, beginning with The New York Times in January, followed by the French channel France 24 during the same year.
In September, The Washington Post and The New York Times revealed investigative information based on classified documents indicating that the Sudanese army had established a stockpile of chemical weapons, including the production and development of munitions and bombs containing chlorine gas, and that it had used them against the Rapid Support Forces during the ongoing war, while the army denies these allegations.
The Washington Post revealed an investigative report based on evidence and classified documents stating that the Sudanese army had established a secret stockpile of chemical weapons and resorted to using chlorine bombs during the ongoing conflict in Sudan, in a dangerous development that further aggravates the civil war that has been raging for three years and has produced the world's worst humanitarian crisis.
Documents obtained by The New York Times indicated that the Sudanese army had developed and produced munitions containing chlorine gas and was alleged to have used them against the Rapid Support Forces during the civil war.
Before the 112th session of the Executive Council of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, held in The Hague last July, the United States again said that the Sudanese army had used chemical weapons during 2024, considering Sudan to have remained in non-compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention during 2025. It added that, following a "rigorous and independent technical analysis," it had concluded that the Sudanese government had used chemical weapons during 2024 and had remained in non-compliance during 2025.
Sudan has been a state party to the Chemical Weapons Convention since 1999, and therefore the use of toxic chemicals as weapons constitutes a violation of Sudan's international obligations. Nevertheless, an independent international investigation remains limited, while Port Sudan presented a national investigation that concluded that no evidence proving the use of chemical weapons had been found.
The United States rejected the national mechanism as a substitute for independent international verification.
A Support Base for the Army
Among the regional actors involved in the Sudanese war, Egypt is one of the most prominent, although Cairo has denied providing military support to either side of the conflict. It has, however, openly and explicitly declared its support for the army led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan.
Egypt has engaged in international initiatives to end the war, but Reuters reported last November that a powerful model of Turkish combat drones had been deployed on an airstrip along Egypt's southwestern border. Satellite images from Vantor, a US company specializing in space technology, showed a large drone on the runway of an airport in East Oweinat on September 29, December 28, and January 9.
In the same context, The New York Times also published images of Akinci drones at East Oweinat Airport, which it reported were being used to conduct strikes in Sudan.
The Akinci is one of the most advanced drones produced by Turkish defence company Baykar. It is capable of flying at high altitudes, remaining airborne for 24 hours, and carrying a large array of munitions.
Egypt had warned that the country's national security is directly linked to Sudan's security and that Cairo would not allow the crossing of "red lines," but it decided to support the army despite allegations against it of committing war crimes.
Saudi Arabia- From Mediator to Party
Among the most prominent regional actors is Saudi Arabia, which was part of the Quartet mechanism alongside the United States, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt.
Reuters revealed that Saudi Arabia had mediated a Pakistani arms deal for the Sudanese army worth approximately $1.5 billion, then Riyadh requested that the deal be cancelled and informed Islamabad that it would not finance it.
Last August, the Sudanese army received Pakistani-made armoured vehicles known as "Muhafiz," along with Shahpar drones from the family of tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and unmanned combat aircraft developed by Pakistan's National Engineering & Scientific Commission and the National Defence Complex. Pakistani media close to the government reported that the deal had been brokered by Saudi Arabia.
Among the most prominent reasons for Saudi Arabia's support for al-Burhan are its interests in the Red Sea. The two countries have signed agreements to develop Sudan's oil sector, grant Saudi Arabia priority in agricultural and mining investment, establish a modern airport, and expand Port Sudan.
The issue of the maritime border between Saudi Arabia and Sudan also remains unresolved, amid the presence of the Atlantis Basin in the Red Sea between Jeddah and Port Sudan. The area is considered one of the most intriguing from a geological and economic standpoint, due to previous studies indicating the presence of deposits of zinc, silver, copper, cadmium, mercury, gold, iron, and other minerals. Some previous assessments have estimated the potential value of these resources at billions of dollars.
Turkey- The Drones Tested in Sudan
In September 2026, the UN Fact-Finding Mission said that both sides of the war had committed serious violations of international law, and that some drone operations could amount to war crimes, while The New York Times reported that the army relies primarily on drones in its indiscriminate strikes.
Here, Turkey's role comes into focus. It is regarded as one of al-Burhan's most prominent allies. Al-Burhan has visited Ankara several times, where he met President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and signed defence-related agreements with him, at a time when Turkey had entered the war as a mediator.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
In March 2025, The Washington Post revealed documents, communications, commercial records, and flight data that it said documented the arrival of Turkish-made weapons and drones to the Sudanese army.
The Sudanese Defence Industries System signed a contract worth approximately $120 million with Turkish company Baykar to provide drones and munitions. The shipments arrived in Sudan in 2024, with Turkish technicians present to assist in operating the equipment. Ankara, for its part, denied providing military support to either side in the war, according to the newspaper's investigation.
Double Standards
Meanwhile, the international community continues to deal with the war in Sudan according to double standards, as crimes committed against civilians are not viewed in the same manner. There is extensive scrutiny of allegations against the Rapid Support Forces, while allegations directed at the army are overlooked despite being documented by a major international organization such as Human Rights Watch.
In January 2025, the United States imposed sanctions on al-Burhan and accused the Sudanese Armed Forces under his command of committing violations of international humanitarian law, targeting civilians and infrastructure, carrying out killings, and obstructing the delivery of humanitarian aid. At the same time, al-Burhan remained a key participant in international diplomatic contacts concerning Sudan and continued to represent Sudan at the United Nations.
As al-Burhan has repeatedly refused to end the war, Reuters reported that Washington was withholding a visa from al-Burhan, who was scheduled to address the United Nations General Assembly in September 2026, amid US efforts to link his attendance to acceptance of a proposed ceasefire.
