Published on: 2026-02-25

AI-powered OSINT brief from verified open sources. Automated NLP signal extraction with human verification. See our Methodology and Why WorldWideWatchers.

Intelligence Report: UNSC condemns RSF attacks in Sudans Kordofan calls for an end to the war

1. BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has condemned the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) for escalating violence in Sudan, particularly in Kordofan and Darfur. The UNSC’s actions, including sanctions on RSF leaders, aim to pressure an end to hostilities. The conflict has resulted in significant humanitarian crises, including mass displacement and famine. Overall confidence in this assessment is moderate.

2. Competing Hypotheses

• Hypothesis A: The RSF is primarily responsible for the escalation of violence in Sudan, as evidenced by UNSC reports of drone attacks and atrocities in Darfur and Kordofan. However, there is uncertainty about the full extent of SAF’s involvement and potential provocations.
• Hypothesis B: The violence is a result of mutual escalation between RSF and SAF, with both parties contributing significantly to the humanitarian crisis. Evidence includes reports of SAF breaking sieges and RSF’s strategic shifts, but lacks detailed attribution of specific incidents.
• Assessment: Hypothesis A is currently better supported due to the UNSC’s specific condemnation of RSF actions and the imposition of sanctions on RSF leaders. Indicators that could shift this judgment include verified reports of SAF’s direct involvement in similar atrocities.

3. Key Assumptions and Red Flags

• Assumptions: The UNSC’s information is accurate and unbiased; RSF leadership has control over its forces; sanctions will impact RSF operations.
• Information Gaps: Detailed attribution of specific incidents to either RSF or SAF; internal dynamics within RSF and SAF leadership; the effectiveness of sanctions.
• Bias & Deception Risks: Potential bias in UNSC reporting due to geopolitical interests; RSF or SAF propaganda influencing public perception; manipulation of casualty and displacement figures.

4. Implications and Strategic Risks

The ongoing conflict in Sudan could further destabilize the region, exacerbating humanitarian crises and potentially spilling over into neighboring countries. The UNSC’s actions may deter RSF aggression or provoke further defiance.

• Political / Geopolitical: Increased international pressure on Sudanese factions; potential for regional diplomatic interventions.
• Security / Counter-Terrorism: Heightened risk of radicalization and recruitment by extremist groups exploiting the chaos.
• Cyber / Information Space: Potential for misinformation campaigns by involved parties to sway international opinion.
• Economic / Social: Worsening economic conditions due to displacement and famine; increased burden on humanitarian organizations.

5. Recommendations and Outlook

• Immediate Actions (0–30 days): Enhance monitoring of RSF and SAF activities; support humanitarian access and protection; increase diplomatic engagement with regional actors.
• Medium-Term Posture (1–12 months): Develop resilience measures for affected populations; strengthen partnerships with regional and international organizations; prepare for potential escalation scenarios.
• Scenario Outlook:
  • Best: Ceasefire agreement leading to peace talks; triggered by effective sanctions and international mediation.
  • Worst: Escalation into a broader regional conflict; triggered by retaliatory actions and breakdown of diplomatic efforts.
  • Most-Likely: Continued low-intensity conflict with intermittent escalations; triggered by ongoing power struggles and resource scarcity.

6. Key Individuals and Entities

• Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (RSF leader)
• RSF high-ranking figures (subject to UNSC sanctions)
• Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)
• United Nations Security Council (UNSC)
• World Food Programme (WFP)

7. Thematic Tags

regional conflicts, conflict escalation, humanitarian crisis, sanctions, Sudan, RSF, UNSC, displacement

Structured Analytic Techniques Applied

• Causal Layered Analysis (CLA): Analyze events across surface happenings, systems, worldviews, and myths.
• Cross-Impact Simulation: Model ripple effects across neighboring states, conflicts, or economic dependencies.
• Scenario Generation: Explore divergent futures under varying assumptions to identify plausible paths.
• Network Influence Mapping: Map influence relationships to assess actor impact.

Explore more:
Regional Conflicts Briefs ·
Daily Summary ·
Support us