Published on: 2025-08-06

Intelligence Report: Why are people in Sudans el-Fasher starving – Al Jazeera English

1. BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)

The most supported hypothesis is that the starvation in el-Fasher is primarily due to the paramilitary Rapid Support Force (RSF) siege, which has disrupted supply lines and humanitarian access. This report employs Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to evaluate the situation. Confidence level: Moderate. Recommended action: Increase diplomatic pressure on RSF to allow humanitarian corridors and engage in negotiations to alleviate the siege.

2. Competing Hypotheses

1. **Hypothesis A**: The starvation in el-Fasher is a direct result of the RSF siege, which has cut off food supplies and humanitarian aid, exacerbating the existing hunger crisis.
2. **Hypothesis B**: The starvation is primarily due to broader systemic issues within Sudan, including economic collapse and ongoing civil war, with the RSF siege being a contributing but not sole factor.

3. Key Assumptions and Red Flags

– **Assumptions**: Hypothesis A assumes that the RSF has the capability and intent to maintain a siege effectively. Hypothesis B assumes that systemic issues are severe enough to independently cause starvation.
– **Red Flags**: Lack of independent verification of conditions within el-Fasher. Potential bias in reporting due to political affiliations of sources.
– **Inconsistencies**: Discrepancies in reports about the extent of RSF control and the effectiveness of SAF countermeasures.

4. Implications and Strategic Risks

– **Patterns**: Continued RSF aggression could lead to further humanitarian crises and potential regional instability.
– **Cascading Threats**: Prolonged siege may lead to increased displacement, regional refugee crises, and potential spread of diseases.
– **Escalation Scenarios**: If the RSF gains control of el-Fasher, it could embolden further territorial ambitions, risking wider conflict.

5. Recommendations and Outlook

• Engage international bodies to mediate a ceasefire and establish humanitarian corridors.
• Monitor RSF movements and intentions closely to anticipate further escalations.
• Scenario Projections:
  • Best: Successful negotiation leads to lifting of the siege and resumption of aid.
  • Worst: RSF consolidates control, leading to wider conflict and humanitarian disaster.
  • Most Likely: Continued stalemate with intermittent humanitarian access.

6. Key Individuals and Entities

– Mohamed Zakaria (Local Journalist)
– RSF (Rapid Support Force)
– SAF (Sudanese Armed Force)
– United Nations Relief Groups

7. Thematic Tags

national security threats, humanitarian crisis, regional instability, conflict resolution