Why are the RSF getting away with mass killings? | DW News

Key Concepts

• RSF (Rapid Support Forces): A paramilitary group in Sudan, primarily composed of pastoralist groups identifying as Arab.
• Impunity: Exemption from punishment or freedom from the injurious consequences of an action.
• Resource Distribution/Usage: Issues related to the allocation and utilization of resources, particularly land, in Sudan.
• Supply Routes: The pathways used to transport fuel and weapons.
• Diplomatic Conversations: Discussions held between government representatives and international bodies.
• Arms Embargo: A ban on the sale or supply of weapons.
• Resolution 2736: A UN resolution concerning the situation in Sudan.

The RSF's Strategy and the Culture of Impunity

The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) operate within and exploit a pervasive culture of global and national impunity. This lack of accountability has enabled them to attack and kill the people of Sudan without facing consequences. The RSF's composition, largely drawn from pastoralist groups who identify as Arab, is significant in the context of the violence directed at sedentary groups and farmers, who identify as African or non-Arab.

Historical Grievances and Resource Conflicts

The roots of this conflict can be traced back to the 1980s, when limitations on resource distribution and usage, particularly concerning land, created significant grievances. These issues were exacerbated by successive bouts of violence, often supported by the government in Khartoum and the Sudanese armed forces. The violence witnessed 20 years ago was largely unaddressed, with no compensation or equitable distribution of land, leaving many of these historical grievances unresolved and contributing to the current situation.

Strategic Importance of El Fasher and Supply Lines

Gaining control of El Fasher is strategically crucial for the RSF. It allows them to secure the western border of Sudan and maintain their supply routes for fuel and weapons. These supplies are predominantly sourced from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and transit through countries like Libya, the Central African Republic, Chad, and parts of South Sudan.

International Diplomacy and Lack of Traction

Diplomats and decision-makers in Western capitals have indicated that private conversations are occurring with the UAE, identified as the primary supplier of weapons to the RSF. However, these discussions appear to be yielding little progress. Publicly, there has been a notable silence from major international actors. Statements from the UK, US, UN, EU, and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) – the regional bloc Sudan belongs to – have consistently avoided naming the UAE or specifying the types of violence being perpetrated. This inaction leaves the people of Darfur feeling isolated and unsupported.

Ineffective International Response and Calls for Action

In contrast to the past, where peacekeeping forces might have been considered 20 years ago, the current international response relies on resolutions that are not being implemented. A key example is Resolution 2736 from the previous year, which, along with a Darfur arms embargo, is not being enforced. The speaker argues that at a minimum, sufficient pressure should be exerted on the RSF, its leadership, and its regional allies in the UAE and other African countries to halt the flow of arms that fuels the ongoing violence.

Conclusion

The RSF's actions are facilitated by a global and national environment of impunity, historical grievances over resource distribution, and a lack of effective international pressure on key state actors like the UAE. Despite diplomatic engagements, public statements and implemented measures have been insufficient to curb the flow of arms and the violence against the Sudanese population, particularly in Darfur. The current international framework, characterized by unimplemented resolutions and unaddressed arms embargoes, highlights a critical failure to protect civilians and hold perpetrators accountable.