Sudan's RSF has no "well-articulated governance strategy"

Key Concepts

• RSF (Rapid Support Forces): A paramilitary group involved in conflict in Sudan.
• Al Faser: A recently captured strategic location by the RSF.
• West Kufan: A key target area for the RSF, identified for its economic potential.
• Hiji: A specific location near Babbanusa, significant for Sudan's main oil pipeline and as a dairy hub.
• Babbanusa: A geographical reference point near Hiji.
• Obay: A historically large mercantile center in Kurdan, targeted by the RSF.
• Kurdan: A region mentioned in relation to Obay.
• Revenue Streams: Sources of income, crucial for funding the RSF's war efforts.
• Governance Strategy: A plan for administering and governing captured territories and populations.
• Rule of Law: The principle that all people and institutions are subject to and accountable to law that is fairly applied and enforced.

RSF's Strategic Objectives and Territorial Expansion The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are actively leveraging their recent capture of Al Faser to generate momentum for further territorial expansion. Their immediate strategic focus is directed towards West Kufan, which is identified as a "very key area" due to its potential to open "lucrative revenue streams." This expansion is explicitly aimed at sustaining their ongoing war efforts.

Key Economic Targets and Revenue Streams The RSF's strategy involves seizing specific economically vital locations to extract resources and revenue. Two prominent examples of these targets are highlighted:

• Hiji: Located in close proximity to Babbanusa, Hiji is critically important as it hosts Sudan's main oil pipeline. Beyond its oil infrastructure, Hiji is also recognized as a "large dairy hub," presenting diverse opportunities for economic exploitation.
• Obay: Situated within Kurdan, Obay is historically known as a "large mercantile center." Control over such a hub would provide the RSF with substantial commercial revenue. The overarching objective for the RSF in taking these areas is to "extract revenue from those areas and keep the war effort going," directly funding their military operations.

RSF's Governance Deficiencies and Future Challenges Despite their territorial gains and clear economic objectives, the RSF is noted to fundamentally lack a crucial aspect of long-term control: a "well articulated governance strategy." This significant deficiency manifests in several critical areas:

• Service Provision: There is "no well articulated plan for how to provide services" to the populations residing in the territories under their control.
• Infrastructure Development: Similarly, a clear strategy for developing or maintaining essential "infrastructure" is absent.
• Rule of Law: The RSF has not presented any framework for establishing "rule of law," which is fundamental for societal order and stability.
• Citizen Guarantees: Crucially, there are no "guarantees for people to live in those areas as citizens rather than as subjects." This implies a lack of fundamental rights, protections, and a stable legal framework for the inhabitants. This absence of a coherent governance plan is identified as a "huge problem for them," a challenge that is expected to intensify "even as they continue to gain more territories and therefore more people under their control." The implication is that while military success may bring territory, the inability to govern effectively will inevitably lead to greater instability and potential resistance.

Conclusion: The Paradox of Territorial Gain The RSF's current strategy prioritizes military conquest and the acquisition of economically valuable territories such as West Kufan, Hiji, and Obay, primarily to secure revenue for its war machine. However, this intense focus on immediate financial gain is critically undermined by a profound lack of a comprehensive governance strategy. The absence of clear plans for providing services, maintaining infrastructure, establishing the rule of law, and guaranteeing citizen rights poses a significant long-term challenge. This suggests that their expanding control over land and people will paradoxically lead to greater administrative and social instability rather than consolidated and legitimate power.