Fifteen months of the RSF militia’s war against the Sudanese people, and the associated unprecedented atrocities have so far met inadequate response from the international community.
True, the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2736,13 June 2024, which demands the RSF end its siege of El-Fasher is significant. However, it falls short of unequivocally condemning the Militia for its brutal crimes.
On June 5th 2024, another carnage took place in Wad-al-Nora village, Al-Gazirah state. Around 270 villagers were slaughtered.
Despite global outrage over these crimes, in many aspects, the international community’s response appears slow, and insufficient and amounts to apathy.
Apathy encourages impunity
The result is continued and unchecked ethnic cleansing and killings by the Militia in different parts of the country. The latest UN resolution and international condemnations essentially call for the RSF to behave themselves. This soft approach mistakenly assumes the Militia possesses a level of morality, legitimacy or discipline. The RAF’s response to the resolution; a major attack on El-Fasher, demonstrates its disregard for international diplomacy.
Short memory?
Historically, the Janjaweed were globally known for their brutality in the Darfur conflict, with their crimes leading to the International Criminal Court’s involvement in 2005. Yet, certain Western quarters seem to have forgotten that the RSF is essentially an upgraded version of the Janjaweed, as the Enough Project puts it. Various international publications equally recall that the RSF evolved from the Janjaweed, infamous for ethnic cleansing and genocide. Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia, explains “The RSF grew out of, and is primarily composed of, the Janjaweed militias”.
Thus, compared to its response to the Janjaweed crimes during the Darfur conflict 2003-2009, the international community seems this time indifferent towards their renewed atrocities, though the current victims constitute almost half of the Sudanese population.
Changing context
Hemetti’s rise to the post of Deputy President of the Sovereign Council occurred during an extremely difficult transitional period following the ousting of the former regime by a popular uprising. As the nation emerged from multiple conflicts and with a view to minimizing any resistance to the change that would exacerbate the already precarious situation, the RSF had to be accommodated, along with the very armed struggle movements whom it had been fighting on behalf of the former regime. It was envisaged then that such arrangements would usher the country into a new dispensation based on a broader national accord. Accordingly, RSF was supposed to be integrated into the national army, SAF, after being reformed and rehabilitated, under the supervision of the latter. However, meddling in the process from both external powers and local politicians aborted this effort, strengthening the RSF instead. Thanks to its regional sponsor and appropriation of the bigger part of the country’s gold wealth, the Militia now boasts advanced weaponry, significant economic control, and a PR network. Sudan was a few steps away from joining the list of Middle Eastern countries that are effectively run by militias.
With the heavy losses in manpower it suffered early in the war, the Militia has reverted to its Janjaweed origins, especially after the termination of SAF officer secondments and voluntary demobilizations within the RSF. Hemetti was removed from his post in May 2023, and the RSF was disbanded by the SAF Commander in September 2023. Therefore, it is Janjaweed unmasked who are now fighting the Sudanese people.
Courting the beast
Certain European powers began courting the RSF before the former regime fell, to help control irregular migration through Darfur and Libya. These dealings gave Hemetti pseudo-legitimacy and significant revenue, facilitating the recruitment of mercenaries, including illegal immigrants attracted by high pay.
Military victory against terrorism
The notion that “there is no military victory in this war” deserves scrutiny. While war is undesirable, defending against aggression is a right and duty. Historical precedents, such as the defeat of Nazism, Fascism, and ISIS, show that military action can be necessary and effective. Thus the question should be how, and not whether the war against terrorism is won. The SAF is currently winning the war against the RSF militia, which now resorts to targeting remote villages and small towns, displaying tactics typical of terrorist groups like ISIS and Boko Haram.
People’s resistance and the right to self-defence
Criticism of arming willing civilians for self-defence against the RSF is misplaced. The right to self-defence is fundamental, especially in a vast, underdeveloped country like Sudan facing a terrorist militia. International precedents support the legitimacy of people’s resistance against colonial or terrorist forces.
In summary, the international community’s soft approach to the Janjaweed RSF and its leader Hemetti is counterproductive, given the Militia’s history and current actions. A firmer stance is needed to address the Janjweed’s renewed crimes and support Sudan’s fight against this terrorist group.