Sudan: RSF-Aligned Govt Accuses Sudan Army of 'Chemical Weapons Attack in North Kordofan'
The Rapid Support Forces-aligned Sudan Founding Alliance (Tasees) has accused the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) of using internationally banned chemical weapons in an air strike on Umm Garfa, North Kordofan, killing 10 civilians and injuring 18.
Intelligence analysis by Gemini 2.5 Flash
Tasees alleges the SAF used chemical weapons, possibly chlorine gas, during a Saturday air strike in North Kordofan, targeting civilians and water sources. This accusation comes as the US imposed new sanctions on Sudan over chemical weapons use, which Sudan denies, affirming its commitment to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Imagine two big groups in Sudan are fighting, like a really big, serious playground fight. One group, called Tasees, is saying the other group, the army, dropped special bombs that made a bad yellow smoke and hurt people and animals, like a super unfair trick. Other countries, like the US, are already upset with the army for using bad weapons and are stopping them from getting certain things. The army says it's not true and wants people to come check, but it's a very serious accusation.
Analysis
Allegations of Chemical Warfare
The Sudan Founding Alliance (Tasees), aligned with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has leveled grave accusations against the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), claiming the use of internationally banned chemical weapons. The alleged incident occurred during an air strike on Umm Garfa in North Kordofan, resulting in the deaths of 10 civilians and injuries to 18 others. Tasees spokesperson Ahmed Tagad Lisan detailed that the bombardment targeted civilian gatherings and water sources, also causing livestock fatalities. Videos purportedly showing a dark plume of smoke after the strike have circulated on social media, adding a visual dimension to the claims.
Further supporting these allegations, the Sudan Liberation Movement-Democratic Council (SLM-DC) specifically suggested that a Soviet-built Antonov cargo aircraft belonging to the SAF dropped barrel bombs that released thick yellow smoke, raising concerns about the potential deployment of chlorine gas. However, these claims remain unverified by independent sources, including Radio Dabanga, which reported on the accusations. The Dar Hammar Emergency Room, located near the alleged bombardment site, confirmed SAF aircraft and drones destroyed 14 RSF combat vehicles on the same day, but did not comment on chemical weapons use.
International Scrutiny and Sanctions
The timing of these allegations coincides with a significant international response to Sudan's ongoing conflict. A second phase of US sanctions against Sudan has taken effect, introducing stricter export controls and further restrictions on financial assistance. Washington's decision to impose these sanctions was based on its determination that the Sudanese government had previously used chemical weapons. This move underscores the international community's growing concern over the conduct of the war.
In response, Sudan's Foreign Ministry vehemently rejected the US sanctions, labeling them as politically motivated and founded on "false allegations." The ministry reiterated Sudan's commitment to the Chemical Weapons Convention and expressed its readiness to cooperate with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) through internationally recognized verification procedures. Earlier in the month, a Sudanese government committee informed an OPCW meeting in The Hague that it had found no evidence of chemical weapons use, while the United States continued to press for international inspectors to be granted access to Sudan to investigate such claims.
Escalation in the Sudanese Conflict
The accusations of chemical weapons use mark a deeply troubling escalation in the already devastating conflict between the SAF and RSF. Such allegations, regardless of their verification status, intensify the humanitarian crisis and further complicate efforts towards a peaceful resolution. The deliberate targeting of civilians and essential resources, as alleged by Tasees, would constitute severe violations of international humanitarian law. The ongoing conflict has already displaced millions and caused widespread suffering, and the introduction of chemical weapons would represent a new, horrific dimension to the violence.
Moreover, the US sanctions and calls for OPCW investigations highlight the increasing international pressure on the warring parties. Should the chemical weapons allegations be substantiated, Sudan could face even greater international isolation, potentially leading to more stringent sanctions and calls for accountability for war crimes. The lack of independent verification, however, leaves a critical gap, making the OPCW's access and investigation paramount for establishing the truth and ensuring justice, while also potentially influencing the trajectory of the conflict and future peace efforts.
Key points
- The RSF-aligned Sudan Founding Alliance (Tasees) accused the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) of using chemical weapons in an air strike on Umm Garfa, North Kordofan.
- The alleged attack killed 10 civilians and injured 18, with claims of deliberate targeting of civilian gatherings and water sources.
- The Sudan Liberation Movement-Democratic Council (SLM-DC) suggested SAF used Soviet-built Antonov aircraft to drop barrel bombs releasing thick yellow smoke, raising concerns about chlorine gas.
- Radio Dabanga could not independently verify the chemical weapons claims.
- The allegations coincide with new US sanctions on Sudan over chemical weapons use, which Sudan's Foreign Ministry rejected as politically motivated and false.
The unverified allegations of chemical weapons use risk a severe escalation of the Sudanese conflict, potentially leading to further international isolation and more stringent sanctions against Sudan. This could deepen the humanitarian crisis, prolong the fighting, and make any future peace negotiations significantly more challenging, with a high risk of continued civilian casualties and war crimes.