Independent United Nations human rights investigators have concluded that foreign recruitment and external support networks are actively fuelling the brutal conflict in Sudan, according to a new report released on Thursday that calls for accountability as fighting persists between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces 1. The findings add a detailed layer to a growing body of evidence that the war, which erupted in April 2023, has been sustained and intensified by transnational flows of weapons, drones, and personnel to both warring parties, transforming a domestic power struggle into a proxy arena with significant regional and international dimensions.
Since the outbreak of hostilities, the conflict has pitted the regular army under General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan against the Rapid Support Forces commanded by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti. What began as a contest for control of the transitional government has evolved into a protracted war that has fractured the country along geographic, ethnic, and political lines. Multiple reports from UN panels of experts and independent monitors have documented the transfer of military equipment — including advanced drones, armored vehicles, and small arms — to both the SAF and the RSF, often in violation of existing arms embargoes. These supply chains have enabled both sides to sustain high-intensity combat operations far beyond what their domestic industrial bases could support, prolonging a war that has killed tens of thousands and displaced millions.
The latest report from the independent investigators focuses specifically on the human rights implications of this external involvement. It details how foreign recruitment — whether through state-sponsored channels, private security contractors, or informal networks — has supplemented the manpower of both forces, while external financial and logistical backing has underwritten procurement and operational planning. The investigators stress that such involvement not only violates international law but also deepens the accountability gap, as the chain of command for abuses committed by foreign fighters or units equipped and directed from abroad remains opaque. The report urges the international community to pursue targeted sanctions, asset freezes, and judicial measures against individuals and entities identified as enablers of the conflict.
The humanitarian consequences of the externally sustained warfare are staggering. Even before the latest surge in violence, UN agencies estimated that more than half of Sudan's population required humanitarian assistance, with millions displaced internally and across borders into neighboring countries that are themselves fragile. The destruction of health infrastructure, the weaponization of hunger through siege tactics, and the systematic targeting of civilian communities have created conditions that the UN has described as among the worst humanitarian crises in the world. External arms flows have directly contributed to this toll by enabling the indiscriminate bombardment of urban centers, the blockade of aid corridors, and the commission of atrocities that may amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Diplomatic efforts to halt the fighting have so far produced only fragile, short-lived ceasefires. Since the war began, multiple mediation tracks — led by the African Union, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the United States, Saudi Arabia, and others — have yielded temporary pauses that quickly collapsed amid mutual accusations of violations. The Security Council has remained sharply divided over how to respond, with members clashing over three interconnected tracks: the imposition or tightening of sanctions, the flow of external arms into the country, and the revival of a stalled political process. These divisions have prevented the adoption of a robust monitoring mechanism or a binding resolution that could alter the calculus of the warring parties and their external backers.
The new report's emphasis on accountability reflects a growing recognition that the conflict cannot be resolved through humanitarian aid or ceasefire monitoring alone. By mapping the external networks that sustain the war, the investigators aim to provide a factual basis for concrete measures — including targeted designations, export controls, and support for national and international judicial proceedings. The report also underscores the need for a coordinated regional approach, as several neighboring states have been implicated either as conduits for arms transfers or as hosts for recruitment and training activities. Without addressing these cross-border enablers, any political settlement risks being undermined by continued military pressure from abroad.
Looking ahead, the Security Council's next steps will be closely watched by humanitarian organizations, regional governments, and Sudanese civilian resistance movements that have persisted despite repression. Options on the table may include a new resolution authorizing a more robust monitoring mechanism, expanded sanctions criteria that capture external facilitators, and a renewed push for a unified mediation framework that can bring both the SAF and the RSF — and their foreign backers — to a credible negotiating table. The investigators' findings make clear that the path to peace in Sudan runs not only through Khartoum but through the capitals and boardrooms where the war's external enablers calculate their interests.