Lara Kajs
Dispatches from the Field — The Genocide Report
Washington, DC — 23 April 2026
The ongoing conflict in Sudan reflects a profound breakdown in state authority, with direct and sustained consequences for civilian protection. What began as a power struggle between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces has evolved into a complex and protracted crisis marked by widespread displacement, humanitarian collapse, and mounting evidence of systematic violence against civilians. As conditions deteriorate, the situation increasingly aligns with established indicators of atrocity crimes, raising urgent concerns for both regional stability and international accountability.
Fragmentation of the State and Escalation of Violence
Since the outbreak of hostilities, Sudan has experienced rapid institutional fragmentation. Competing centers of power have weakened command-and-control structures, reducing the capacity of any single authority to enforce compliance with international norms. In this environment, armed actors operate with increasing autonomy, contributing to patterns of violence that are less restrained and more opportunistic.
Urban centers, including Khartoum and Darfur regions, have witnessed sustained clashes, with civilian populations caught in the crossfire. Infrastructure critical to civilian survival—including hospitals, water systems, and supply routes—has been damaged or rendered inoperable. The resulting conditions have significantly constrained humanitarian access and deepened the vulnerability of affected populations.
The erosion of centralized authority in Sudan has created conditions in which civilian protection is no longer incidental to the conflict—it is structurally absent.”
Patterns of Abuse and Civilian Targeting
Emerging reports from humanitarian organizations, United Nations monitors, and field observers indicate consistent and geographically dispersed patterns of abuse against civilian populations. These include deliberate attacks on non-combatants, widespread looting of civilian property, and forced displacement carried out under coercive conditions. In the Darfur region in particular, credible accounts suggest that violence has taken on an ethnic dimension, raising concerns about the re-emergence of identity-based targeting that has historically characterized mass atrocity episodes in the region.
The operational environment in which these abuses occur is defined by limited oversight and weak command structures. Armed actors—both formal and irregular—appear to operate with significant autonomy, reducing the likelihood that violations are either prevented or punished. This erosion of accountability mechanisms has contributed to a pattern in which abuses recur across different areas with little variation, suggesting not only permissive conditions but also a degree of normalization in the conduct of hostilities.
Sexual violence has also been documented as a recurring feature of the conflict. While often underreported due to stigma and insecurity, available information indicates that such acts are being used as a method of intimidation, coercion, and social disruption. In this context, sexual violence functions not only as an individual crime but as part of a broader strategy that affects families and communities, reinforcing displacement and undermining social cohesion.
Taken together, these patterns reflect a shift in which violence against civilians is no longer incidental to military operations but has become embedded within the broader dynamics of the conflict. The cumulative effect is the normalization of such acts as an expected feature of the operating environment rather than an aberration.
Humanitarian Collapse and Displacement
The humanitarian situation in Sudan has deteriorated at a rapid pace, reflecting both the scale of the conflict and the sustained disruption of essential systems. Millions of individuals have been internally displaced or forced to flee across borders into neighboring states, including Chad, South Sudan, and Egypt, placing additional strain on already fragile regional resources and infrastructure. Displacement has not only increased in scale but has also become more protracted, with limited prospects for safe return under current conditions.
Food insecurity has intensified significantly as agricultural production has been disrupted by insecurity, displacement of farming communities, and damage to supply chains. Markets have been destabilized, and access to basic goods has become increasingly constrained. In several regions, these factors are contributing to heightened risks of acute malnutrition and localized famine conditions, particularly among vulnerable populations.
Humanitarian organizations face significant operational constraints, that limit both reach and effectiveness. Insecurity remains a primary barrier, with aid convoys subject to delays, diversion, or attack. Administrative restrictions and bureaucratic impediments further complicate access, while funding gaps reduce the capacity of organizations to scale their response. As a result, humanitarian assistance has been inconsistent and, in many areas, insufficient to meet the scale of need.
The cumulative impact of these conditions is a sustained deterioration in living standards, with affected populations facing compounding vulnerabilities. The inability to deliver reliable assistance not only exacerbates immediate suffering but also contributes to longer-term instability by weakening already fragile coping mechanisms within communities.
International Response and Policy Constrains
International engagement with the crisis in Sudan has been characterized by fragmentation and limited policy cohesion. While multiple actors—including regional organizations and international institutions—have pursued diplomatic initiatives aimed at securing ceasefires or facilitating negotiations, these efforts have thus far failed to produce durable reductions in violence. Temporary pauses in hostilities have not translated into sustained political progress, and fighting has continued across multiple fronts.
Policy responses have also been shaped by competing geopolitical priorities, which have constrained the scope and consistency of international action. While targeted sanctions and calls for accountability have been proposed, implementation has been uneven, and enforcement mechanisms remain limited. This has reduced the deterrent effect of such measures and contributed to perceptions among armed actors that violations will not result in meaningful consequences.
At the same time, divisions within the international community have complicated efforts to establish a unified approach. Differences in strategic interests, regional alignments, and diplomatic priorities have limited the ability to coordinate pressure or align policy tools effectively. The result is an environment in which responses are reactive rather than strategic, and where gaps in engagement can be exploited by actors on the ground.
In the absence of a sustained and coordinated international strategy, the current trajectory of the conflict is unlikely to shift. The continued lack of accountability, combined with limited diplomatic leverage, reinforces a permissive environment in which violations of international law persist with minimal constraint.
Atrocity Prevention Lens
The situation in Sudan presents multiple, reinforcing indicators of atrocity risk. These include the fragmentation of state authority, the proliferation of armed actors with weak command structures, patterns of identity-based targeting, and the systematic erosion of civilian protection mechanisms. The persistence of impunity further exacerbates these risks, signaling to perpetrators that violations will not be met with meaningful consequences.
Preventive strategies require a combination of immediate and long-term measures. In the near term, security humanitarian access and reinforcing civilian protection mechanisms are critical. This includes sustained diplomatic pressure on all parties to comply with international humanitarian obligations. Over the longer term, efforts must focus on restoring governance structures, strengthening accountability frameworks, and supporting regional stabilization initiatives.
Absent these interventions, the risk of further escalation—including the commission of atrocity crimes on a larger scale—remains high.
Legal Framework
International Humanitarian Law
The conflict in Sudan is governed by the principles of international humanitarian law, including the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. These frameworks establish the obligation of all parties to distinguish between civilians and combatants and to ensure the protection of civilian populations and infrastructure. Attacks directed against civilians, as well as the destruction of essential infrastructure without military necessity, constitute violations of these legal standards.
Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes
Patterns of widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations may meet the threshold for crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Additionally, acts such as targeting civilians, sexual violence, and forced displacement may constitute war crimes when committed in the context of an armed conflict.
Responsibility to Protect
Under the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, the international community holds a collective responsibility to respond when a state is unable or unwilling to protect its population from atrocity crimes. The conditions in Sudan increasingly raise questions regarding the application of this principle, particularly in light of the scale and persistence of civilian harm.
Suggested Citation
Kajs, Lara. “Sudan’s War and the Collapse of Civilian Protection.” Dispatches from the Field. The Genocide Report, Washington, DC, 22 April 2026.
Photo Credit
Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in El Fasher, Sudan, after the fall of the city, 28 October 2025, by Alwedatalah. Licensed under CC BY 4.0
About TGR
The Genocide Report (TGR) publishes analysis and educational resources on conflict, international law, and atrocity prevention. Its work seeks to bridge academic research, field realities, and public understanding of mass violence and civilian protection.
About the Author
Lara Kajs is the founder and executive director of The Genocide Report, a Washington, DC-based educational nonprofit focused on atrocity prevention and international law. She is the author of several field-based books on conflict, displacement, humanitarian crises, and international humanitarian law, drawing on extensive research and field experience in Yemen, Syria, and Afghanistan. Her writing and public speaking focus on atrocity crimes, forced displacement, the protection of civilians, and the legal frameworks governing armed conflict.