Sudan
Expected Council Action
In June, the Security Council is expected to receive the regular 120-day briefing on the situation in Sudan.
The Council is also expected to be briefed on the work of the 1591 Sudan Sanctions Committee.
Key Recent Developments
Hostilities continued between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, head of the Sudanese Transitional Sovereign Council, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a Sudanese paramilitary led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo. By late March, the SAF had recaptured Khartoum, regaining control over key sites such as the presidential palace and the international airport. On 20 May, it announced full control over Khartoum state after expelling RSF fighters from their remaining strongholds in the southern parts of Omdurman. Meanwhile, the conflict in the Kordofan region reportedly intensified, with repeated artillery attacks, shelling, and drone strikes, resulting in dozens of civilian casualties.
In early May, the RSF reportedly launched a series of drone strikes over six consecutive days beginning on 4 May in Port Sudan—the country’s de facto administrative capital, which had previously remained largely insulated from the conflict. The attacks targeted key civilian and military infrastructure, including the international airport, a military airbase, fuel depots, and power stations. On 14 May, RSF drone strikes reportedly hit three power stations in Omdurman, causing widespread electricity outages across the capital region.
The security situation in El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur state, and surrounding areas remained extremely volatile. In mid-April, the RSF intensified its siege and attacks on the city through shelling, drone strikes, and ground operations, resulting in hundreds of civilian casualties, the killing of aid workers, and mass displacement. Subsequently, the RSF seized control of the Zamzam camp for internally displaced people (IDP) and continued its offensive, including coordinated assaults on civilians, further worsening an already dire humanitarian crisis. According to some estimates, the scale of violence and displacement in Darfur has reached its highest level since the conflict in the 2000s, which claimed the lives of approximately 300,000 people. (For background and more information, see our 15 April and 18 May What’s in Blue stories.)
On 19 May, Burhan issued a decree appointing Kamil Eltayeb Idris as Sudan’s Prime Minister. In a 7 May statement, UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed the hope that Idris’ appointment would mark a first step toward inclusive consultations aimed at establishing a broad-based technocratic government and advancing the peace process. The following day (20 May), African Union (AU) Commission Chairperson (AUCC) Mahmoud Ali Youssouf commended this development as a step toward inclusive governance and urged all Sudanese stakeholders to intensify their efforts toward a “peaceful, civilian-led, and inclusive transition”.
On 17 May, Arab leaders adopted a communiqué at the conclusion of the 34th summit of the League of Arab States, underscoring the importance of reaching a political solution to the conflict in Sudan that safeguards the country’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the safety of its civilians. The communiqué highlighted the urgent need to ensure safe and unhindered humanitarian access and called on all parties to engage constructively with efforts to resolve the crisis, including the Jeddah process, brokered by Saudi Arabia and the US.
Human Rights-Related Developments
In an 8 May press release, a group of independent human rights experts strongly condemned the targeted attacks carried out by the RSF on the Zamzam and Abu Shouk IDP camps in North Darfur. The experts expressed grave concern over the escalating humanitarian crisis, highlighting that the violence has forced millions of IDPs into life-threatening conditions, depriving them of access to food, water, shelter, and basic protection. They received reports of systematic violations, mostly committed by RSF-affiliated militias, including sexual violence, sexual slavery, forced recruitment, and the targeting of civilians. They expressed serious concern about conflict-related trafficking, particularly the trafficking of children for recruitment and use, and of women and girls for sexual exploitation, including sexual slavery. They called for increased support for accountability mechanisms and the immediate establishment of safe corridors for humanitarian assistance.
Women, Peace and Security
In a 10 April press briefing on the situation of women and girls in Sudan, UN Women highlighted the devastating impact of the war, particularly the widespread gender-based violence, including conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV). The agency emphasised the crucial role of Sudanese women’s organisations in identifying urgent needs within displacement camps, supporting survivors, and delivering psychosocial care and livelihood training. Noting that these organisations currently receive less than 2 percent of humanitarian assistance in Sudan, UN Women called for long-term support for them.
From 13 to 17 April, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, visited Sudan. During the visit, the Sudanese government renewed the Framework of Cooperation between Sudan and the UN on the Prevention and Response to Sexual Violence in Conflict. Originally signed in 2020, the framework commits the parties to coordinate efforts to strengthen monitoring, analysis, documentation, and information sharing on sexual violence.
In a 14 May press release, several UN independent experts condemned the “widespread and systematic violations” against women and girls in Sudan, including CRSV, abductions, and killings, noting that many of these violations have been attributed to the RSF. The press release reported that at least 330 cases of CRSV have been documented in 2025 thus far, with the real number likely to be significantly higher due to underreporting.
Key Issues and Options
The overarching issue for the Council is how it can contribute to bringing an end to the ongoing fighting and support efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire across Sudan. The continued violence, insecurity, and targeted attacks against civilians remain a major concern for Council members. Another key issue is the changing nature of the conflict, including the use of advanced weaponry and persistent attacks on the country’s critical infrastructure.
As hostilities persist, mediation efforts have consistently failed to achieve any meaningful breakthroughs. In recent months, Council members have issued several press statements on the situation in Sudan. However, these responses have largely been ad hoc, issued in reaction to specific outbreaks of violence or political developments. Being able to promote an effective and coordinated political strategy to resolve the crisis in Sudan remains an ongoing issue for Council members. In this regard, developing a shared understanding of the complexities of the situation and a unified strategy for engagement is critical. In doing so, members need to navigate the competing interests of regional and international actors that continue to shape Sudan’s political and security landscape while underscoring respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sudan.
One option for the Council would be to invite AUCC Youssouf to provide a briefing on the key challenges facing peace efforts in Sudan, the AU’s role in revitalising these efforts, and the broader impact of the conflict on neighbouring countries and regional stability.
Council members could consider holding an informal interactive dialogue with key regional and international stakeholders—including representatives of regional and sub-regional organisations and states involved in mediation efforts—to explore ways to leverage their comparative advantages and harmonise their efforts in support of a coherent political strategy to the crisis.
Given the increasingly dire situation for civilians in Sudan, the Informal Expert Group on the Protection of Civilians could consider convening a meeting to receive briefings from relevant UN entities on the conflict’s impact on civilian populations.
During the regular Council briefing in June, members could consider inviting the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, to brief on the broader human rights situation in Sudan.
Council and Wider Dynamics
Most Council members share similar concerns about the dire political, security, and humanitarian situations in Sudan and have emphasised the need for a ceasefire, unfettered humanitarian access, respect for international humanitarian law, and the importance of protecting civilians in the conflict. However, critical divisions persist within the Council, shaped by differing priorities and approaches to key issues, including the protection of civilians, the implementation of ceasefire mechanisms, and addressing accountability for violations of international humanitarian law. Several Council members, such as Algeria, China, Pakistan, and Russia, tend to be more sympathetic to the Burhan-led government, underscoring its sovereign authority and its efforts to protect civilians and coordinate the delivery of humanitarian aid. Other Council members, such as the US, however, consider both the RSF and SAF to be responsible for the ongoing atrocities in Sudan and unfit to govern the country.
On 22 May, the US announced the imposition of sanctions on Sudan following its determination that the Sudanese government used chemical weapons in 2024 in violation of its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention. These sanctions, set to take effect around 6 June, include restrictions on US exports to Sudan and access to government lines of credit.
The differing positions of the key interlocutors on Sudan were evident at the 15 April ministerial conference in London, which was jointly organised by France, Germany, the UK, and the European Union (EU) to mark the second anniversary of the conflict in Sudan. Media reports indicate that the participating member states failed to adopt a joint communiqué due to disagreements: Egypt and Saudi Arabia reportedly supported language underscoring the importance of preserving state institutions, while the United Arab Emirates (UAE) advocated for stronger language in support of civilian governance.
Tensions have continued to mount between the Sudanese government and the UAE, with Sudan accusing the UAE of supporting the RSF, including through military assistance and alleged involvement in recent drone strikes on Port Sudan. On 6 May, the Sudanese government announced its decision to declare the UAE as an “aggressor” state and sever diplomatic relations. The UAE has repeatedly denied allegations of supporting the conflict in Sudan and transferring weapons to the RSF. In a 7 May press release, the UAE affirmed that it does not recognise the decision of the “Port Sudan authority” to sever diplomatic ties with the UAE, arguing that it “does not represent the legitimate government of Sudan” and remains “one of the two warring parties in Sudan”. (For more information, see our 18 May What’s in Blue story.)
| Security Council Press Statements | |
| 31 May 2025SC/16046 | This press statement expressed deep concern over escalating violence, including in and around El Fasher, North Darfur. |
| Security Council Letters | |
| 7 May 2025S/2025/291 | This was a letter from Sudan requesting a meeting of the Security Council to consider alleged support provided by the UAE to the RSF in Sudan. |
| 2 May 2025S/2025/277 | This was a letter from Sudan refuting claims made by the UAE concerning the final report of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1591 Sudan Sanctions Committee. |
| 29 April 2025S/2025/260 | This was a letter from the UAE refuting allegations made by Sudan regarding the UAE’s alleged support to the RSF. |
| 14 April 2025S/2025/239 | This was a letter from the President of the Security that transmitted the final report of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1591 Sudan Sanctions Committee. |
