Sudan: UNSC Report - July 2025 Monthly Forecast

UN Security Council Report
July 2025 Monthly Forecast 
Dated 30 June 2025 - full copy:

Sudan

Expected Council Action

In July, the Security Council is expected to receive the semi-annual briefing on the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) activities related to the situation in Darfur. ICC Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan is expected to brief.

Background and Key Recent Developments

More than 17 years after the Council’s ICC referral on the situation in Darfur, through resolution 1593 of 31 March 2005, the first trial opened on 5 April 2022 with the case of  Prosecutor v. Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman (“Ali Kushayb”). Abd-Al-Rahman, reportedly a former leader of the Janjaweed militia, is accused of 31 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed between August 2003 and approximately April 2004 in Darfur. The ICC concluded the trial in December 2024, and a decision is expected later this year. (For more information, see our 27 January What’s in Blue story.)

Four arrest warrants issued by the ICC remain outstanding—against former Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir; former Sudanese Minister of State for the Interior Ahmad Muhammad Harun; former Sudanese Minister of National Defence Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein; and former Commander-in-Chief of the Justice and Equality Movement Abdallah Banda Abakaer Nourain. Pursuant to resolution 1593 and the ICCs’ subsequent orders, Sudan remains under an obligation to surrender the four remaining suspects to the Court. According to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), following the outbreak of fighting in April 2023, Bashir, Hussein, and Harun—who had all been in custody in Kober prison in Khartoum—were released. Subsequently, media reports accused Harun of mobilising supporters of the former Bashir regime to fight alongside the army in Khartoum and other parts of Sudan.

According to the ICC Prosecutor’s most recent report, submitted to the Security Council on 16 January pursuant to resolution 1593, the OTP has gathered sufficient evidence to establish reasonable grounds to believe that a wide range of crimes under the Rome Statute have been—and continue to be—committed in Darfur, in the context of the ongoing conflict in Sudan that began in April 2023. These include killings, pillaging, attacks against internally displaced persons (IDP) camps, indiscriminate targeting of civilian populations, gender-based crimes, and crimes against and affecting children. (Under the Rome Statute, the ICC has jurisdiction over four crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.) Furthermore, the OTP has continued to preserve evidence and information regarding alleged crimes committed by the Sudanese warring parties in North Darfur.

In his 27 January briefing to the Security Council, ICC Prosecutor Karim Ahmad Khan highlighted that the pattern of crimes, the perpetrators, and the targeted groups in the context of the ongoing conflict in Sudan closely resemble those from the 2003 conflict, which prompted the Council’s initial referral of the situation to the ICC. Khan emphasised the need to close the impunity gap and called for greater accountability. He expressed concern over widespread allegations regarding the targeting of women and girls, including reports of gender-based crimes. Khan confirmed that the OTP is taking steps to submit applications for arrest warrants in connection with crimes allegedly committed in West Darfur, while stressing that such applications will only be filed once the OTP is satisfied that there is a realistic prospect of conviction. He also underscored the importance of transferring Ahmad Harun to the ICC, noting its potential impact given the clear connection between Harun’s case and the recently concluded trial of Ali Kushayb.

In her remarks during the 53rd session of the Human Rights Council, Under-Secretary-General and Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide ad interim Virginia Gamba said that the Sudanese warring parties in the current conflict have committed serious human rights violations and that the risk of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in Sudan remains very high. She noted that continued and targeted attacks against certain ethnic groups, particularly in the Darfur and Kordofan regions, remain of particular concern. Gamba highlighted that the RSF and allied Arab militias continue to conduct ethnically motivated attacks against the Zaghawa, Masalit, and Fur groups.

In a 16 May statement, ICC Prosecutor Karim Ahmad Khan announced that he would temporarily step aside while the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services conducts an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct, which he has denied. In his absence, the OTP confirmed that Deputy Prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan and Mame Mandiaye Niang have assumed leadership responsibilities.

Human Rights-Related Developments

On 2 June, a humanitarian aid convoy comprising 15 trucks from the WFP and UNICEF came under attack in Al Koma, which is located approximately 80 kilometres from El Fasher. The attack resulted in the deaths of five personnel, injured several others, and destroyed multiple trucks and critical humanitarian supplies. A day earlier (1 June), a separate attack, reportedly attributed to the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), struck a busy market in Al Koma, killing 15 civilians and injuring dozens more. In a 4 June press release, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) called for prompt and impartial investigations into both incidents, along with meaningful steps to ensure accountability. It also urged all parties to the conflict to take concrete measures to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure, and to facilitate safe and unimpeded humanitarian access in accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law.

In a 17 June press release, the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) for Sudan warned that the civil war is intensifying, with devastating consequences for civilians caught in the conflict. The FFM reported the increased use of heavy weaponry in populated areas, with hospitals and medical facilities coming under siege, and a sharp rise in sexual and gender-based violence. It described the situation as “a grave human rights and protection emergency.” In El Fasher, civilians have been assaulted, detained, and killed, while villages have been attacked, burned, and looted by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). 

During one RSF assault from 10 to 13 April, more than 100 civilians were reportedly killed. 

The FFM called on the international community to impose an arms embargo and to take concrete steps to ensure accountability for those responsible for serious human rights violations.

Key Issues and Options

An underlying issue for the Security Council remains how to effectively promote justice and accountability for both past atrocities committed in Darfur and the ongoing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law being perpetrated by Sudan’s warring parties across the country. 

Broadly, the continued violence, insecurity, and targeted attacks against civilians remain a major concern for Council members in the context of the current conflict. The failure to ensure accountability for crimes committed over the past two decades has contributed to the recurrence of violence and impunity in the current conflict.

A key challenge for the Council is how to strengthen cooperation between the ICC and relevant Sudanese authorities, as well as third states and international and regional organisations. This includes facilitating the execution of outstanding arrest warrants, supporting the ICC’s ongoing investigations, and enabling the safe collection and transmission of evidence. A pressing concern in this regard is the documentation, preservation, and analysis of evidence in a highly insecure and fragmented environment. 

The volatile political and security situation in Sudan and in some neighbouring countries has created numerous obstacles for the ICC, including the disruption of planned deployments, limited access to sources of information, and difficulties in maintaining contact with witnesses. Khan’s 16 January report also points to significant resource constraints faced by the OTP, which continue to adversely affect its ability to pursue investigations and carry out its mandate in relation to the situation in Darfur.

Amid growing political sensitivities and divisions among states regarding the ICC’s work, an issue for the Council is how to ensure the Court receives the necessary political backing and resources to advance its mandate, uphold accountability, and help break the cycle of impunity. In addition to the regular briefing in July, Council members supportive of the ICC’s work in Sudan could consider holding a joint press stakeout in connection with the meeting to publicly reaffirm their commitment to justice and accountability.

Council members could also consider inviting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk to brief on the broader human rights situation in Sudan. Additionally, members may wish to invite the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, who visited Sudan from 13 to 17 April, to share insights into the scale and nature of conflict-related sexual violence and the protection needs of affected populations. (For more information, see the Sudan brief in our June 2025 Monthly Forecast.)

Council Dynamics

The Council is divided on the work of the ICC. Denmark, France, Greece, Guyana, Panama, the Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and the UK are states parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC. These members have expressed strong support for the ICC’s efforts, including the conclusion of Ali Kushayb’s trial, and have commended the OTP for its continued pursuit of accountability for crimes committed in Darfur. Several have also endorsed the Prosecutor’s announcement of imminent applications for new arrest warrants linked to the current conflict in Sudan and called on the Sudanese authorities to enhance cooperation with the ICC.

On the other hand, Algeria, China, Pakistan, Russia, Somalia, and the US are not states parties to the ICC’s Rome Statute and have expressed scepticism or outright criticism of the ICC’s role. Russia has been particularly vocal, accusing the Court of selective justice and political bias. Russia’s negative view of the ICC hardened following the Court’s announcement on 17 March 2023 that it had issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova for allegedly committing the war crime of “unlawful deportation” and “unlawful transfer” of children from Ukraine to Russia.

During the Council’s 27 January briefing, Algeria, China, Pakistan, and Somalia underlined the importance of the principle of complementarity and supported Sudan’s judicial sovereignty. Algeria and Somalia also highlighted the need to revitalise Sudanese national justice institutions and to explore existing legal frameworks to administer justice, including African frameworks.

While the US has traditionally supported the ICC’s efforts concerning Sudan, it criticised the ICC for issuing arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity and war crimes linked to Israel’s military actions in Gaza since at least 8 October 2023. 

In response, on 6 February, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order imposing sanctions on the ICC and Khan. On 5 June, the US also sanctioned four individuals serving as ICC judges for their roles in authorising investigations into US personnel in Afghanistan and issuing arrest warrants for Israeli officials.

Several Council members, supportive of the ICC’s work on Darfur, have expressed concern over efforts to undermine the Court’s independence, including through the use of sanctions and political pressure. These members have condemned any attempts to intimidate the OTP, warning that such measures could hinder the Court’s ability to carry out its mandate not only in Sudan but also in other jurisdictions.

Download Complete Forecast: PDF

View original:  https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2025-07/sudan-36.php

End

Sudan: World's largest humanitarian crisis in terms of displacement. 12.7m forcibly displaced. 25m in famine

Presser | United Nations 
Friday, 11 April 2025 - full copy:

Sudan: World's largest humanitarian crisis in terms of displacement

Press Conference by Shaun Hughes, World Food Programme (WFP) Regional Emergency Coordinator for the Sudan Crisis, on the situation in Sudan.

Senior World Food Programme (WFP) official in Sudan Shaun Hughes said, “By any metric, this is the world's largest humanitarian crisis in terms of displacement,” adding that “four out of every five people displaced are women and children.”

Hughes briefed reporters remotely from Nairobi today (10 Apr) on the situation in Sudan.

He said, “12.7 million people have been forcibly displaced from their homes. Over eight million people displaced internally, and four million across borders arriving to countries that are already facing high levels of hunger and humanitarian needs.”

In terms of hunger, the WFP official said, “this is the only place in the world where famine is currently confirmed, and only the third famine to be classified this century.”

Hughes continued, “The scale of what is unfolding in Sudan threatens to dwarf much of what we've seen over previous decades. In the Zamzam camp alone, which has been under siege for several months. There are over 400,000 people.”

The Regional Emergency Coordinator added, “Across the country, nearly 25 million people, or half the population, face extreme hunger. Nearly five million children and mothers are acutely malnourished.”

“This is a man-made crisis, man-made because it is driven by conflict, not by drought or floods or earthquakes, and man-made because of the obstruction of access to humanitarian assistance by parties to the conflict,” the WFP official stressed.

Hughes highlighted that WFP’s goal is to scale up to reach seven million people by mid-year, “focusing primarily on those 27 areas that are classified as in famine or risk of famine.”

He continued, “we need to be able to quickly move humanitarian assistance to where it is needed, including through frontlines, across borders, within contested areas, and without lengthy bureaucratic processes.”

“We need to re-establish offices and staff presence across all areas of the country, including the Darfur and Kordofan states, so that we can be close to the people we serve and monitor assistance and the situation as it unfolds. We need to be able to obtain visas for staff and custom clearances for goods and equipment,” the WFP official added.

He stressed that humanitarian agencies alone don't have the influence to negotiate this, “it requires the world to pay attention and coherent and tenacious engagement from the international community, particularly countries that have influence on those waging war.”

The Regional Emergency Coordinator for Sudan Crisis, World Food Programme (WFP):

For the next six months in Sudan, in order to reach the objective of assisting seven million people, WFP has an 80 percent funding gap amounting to $650 million and another $150 million shortfall to take care of people that are fleeing across borders into Chad, into South Sudan, into the Central African Republic and elsewhere.

“Without funding, we're faced with the choice to either cut the number of people receiving assistance, or to cut the amount of assistance that people receive,” Hughes said.

He explained that the cut is already happening. “This month, we've reduced rations in famine areas to 70 percent of what people need, and in areas that are at risk of famine to 50 percent. The funding we need is not only for food assistance, but also for the joint services that we provide to the broader humanitarian response, including humanitarian air services and logistics services,” Hughes said.

Asked about the funding gap, the WFP official said, “none can be attributed to the broader cuts in US foreign assistance. Fortunately, all allocations that the US government has made to Sudan remain effective, for which we are grateful.”

“I think more broadly that the outlook globally for funding of humanitarian assistance is quite disastrous due to a number of changes in the approach by donors,” he concluded.

Transcript

Follow along using the transcript at video: https://youtu.be/UwQIXSImTGs

End

The London Conference on Sudan 15th April 2025

Presidential Palace Khartoum 2012 by the author

Sudan - can the UK's "progressive realism" help?

Sir Nick Kay

Former Ambassador

April 11, 2025

The world’s worst humanitarian crisis and one of its most dangerous, complex, bloody wars gets a moment in the spotlight in London on 15 April. Foreign ministers and senior officials from international organisations will meet at Lancaster House to discuss Sudan. After two years of conflict, the UK is taking a diplomatic initiative that many believe long overdue given its historical ties and current responsibility at the United Nations Security Council to hold the pen on Sudan resolutions.

But is the conference likely to lead to anything positive for the Sudanese people? 

Expectations are understandably low. The de facto Sudanese authorities led by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have criticised the UK for not inviting them to the conference. They object strongly to the UAE being invited because they consider it an ally of the rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and therefore a party to the conflict. On the ground both the RSF and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have pledged to continue the war until they achieve complete victory. No impartial observer thinks that possible. As the war drags on, Sudan suffers from political polarisation, fragmentation and continued external meddling.

It's too easy to look the other way and too easy to think this is just a messy, protracted struggle that will continue inconclusively. But the immediate future may not be a continuation of the last two years. 

Red warning lights are flashing. Sudan’s neighbour South Sudan is teetering on the brink of civil war and the Sudanese conflict is playing its part in destabilising South Sudan and vice versa. Other neighbouring countries are also vulnerable to fall-out from Sudan: Chad in particular. With any expansion of war in the region, the humanitarian consequences and political risks of spiralling conflict magnify. Within Sudan itself the increased presence of Islamist extremists, armed militia and potentially international terror groups is another flashing light. Geopolitical tensions - already existing - may escalate. The Sudan Armed Forces have been ostracised by western powers and have entered agreements with Russia and Iran in their search for arms. Both countries see establishing a presence on Sudan’s Red Sea coast as a prize. But such a move would be highly provocative for others, including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Over the last two years efforts to broker ceasefires have failed, only limited progress has been made on improving humanitarian access and efforts to bring about a comprehensive political settlement between the various actors - the two military forces, political parties, armed movements and civil society actors - have all led to nought. Many have tried, including the UN, AU, IGAD, the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey but none has succeeded. These “track 1” efforts have been complemented by multiple “track 2” initiatives led by NGOs and peace foundations. But so far the willingness to give as well as take in any negotiation is sorely missing.

Proposals

Absent political will by the protagonists and their external backers, what can be achieved in London? 

Limited but important steps can be agreed in three areas: the humanitarian response, political process and international cooperation. 

On the humanitarian front, the key challenges remain both funding and access. In April 2024 at a conference in Paris, donors made generous pledges totalling USD $2 billion. Much of that has yet to be disbursed. London is not a pledging conference, but should be the opportunity for partners to live up to their past commitments and renew their determination to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance for the 11 million Sudanese forced to flee their homes— food, shelter, medicines and healthcare at a minimum. The challenges for humanitarians are enormous: Sudan’s domestic political and ethnic complexity compounded by the regional tensions with and between Sudan’s neighbours necessitate an enhanced international aid effort coordinated by a senior UN figure. 

A political process remains the missing element and in London agreement may be possible on how to deal with the most immediate challenge as well as on the essential elements for a future process. Since the SAF now control the capital Khartoum again, it is likely they will press ahead with their own political roadmap and appoint a civilian government subordinate to the military to take forward a transition towards eventual restoration of democracy. 

How should the international community respond to this - reject, ignore, embrace, or shape it? Given the risk of Sudan being partitioned into two warring regions - Darfur and the South controlled by the RSF and the North, East and centre being controlled by the SAF - no SAF-imposed roadmap is going to be the final word. Not only will it not include the RSF and its supporters, but also many of the political actors who supported the 2019 revolution, which overthrew General Bashir’s military rule, will have nothing to do with the SAF roadmap. So the challenge for the international community is to try to work within the new political reality on a temporary and tentative basis. The aim should be to shape the SAF’s actions in order to move towards a credible inclusive political transition. The London conference could agree criteria by which such a political process will be judged. Key questions will be: how inclusive is the process and what genuine efforts are made to ensure inclusiveness of all Sudan; how are civil and political rights protected; how will security, justice and reconciliation be achieved; what are the criteria for selection of members of a transitional administration; what real authority will the administration have over economic and budgetary affairs; what are the provisions and realistic timetable for an all-inclusive Sudanese national dialogue? Above all, how firmly enshrined is the commitment to full democratic and civilian rule in Sudan, for which Sudanese men, women and youth struggled and died over the years? 

These are difficult questions that have defied easy answers since 2019. Helping Sudanese actors address them will require substantial and coordinated international action. 

The third way the London conference could contribute is by setting out agreed principles and a framework for the international community. The Sudan crisis is of such a complexity and international nature that it requires a creative and collaborative approach. The conference could propose that an international panel of mediators be appointed, led by the African Union but comprising additional senior figures from beyond Africa. Rank is important and ideally the panel would be at former head of state or government level and mandated by a UN Security Council resolution. The panel’s focus should be on advancing a comprehensive political settlement. Early consultation with the SAF, RSF and Sudanese civil and political actors about the terms of reference will be essential. The conference could agree who should take forward this consultation and a time frame.

Conclusion

Foreign Secretary David Lammy convened the conference after seeing at first hand the devastating impact of the war on Sudanese women and children on the Chad-Sudan border. Just because the Sudan war is complicated and far from our TV screens, we cannot in all conscience ignore it. This is a moment to put the Foreign Secretary’s doctrine of “progressive realism” into action.

 [These are the personal views of the author and do not represent the views of any organisation with which he is associated.]

CMI — Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation 

Diplomats without Borders 

View original: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sudan-can-uks-progressive-realism-help-sir-nick-kay-nc3be/

___________________________

Related 

Sudan Watch - 19 Nov 2010

British Ambassador in Khartoum Nicholas Kay is blogging the drama and scale of the change taking place in Sudan

The British government's Foreign & Commonwealth Office, commonly called the Foreign Office or the FCO, has started a blog about the work of the British Ambassador to Sudan. The blog is authored by Nicholas Kay CMG, Her Majesty's Ambassador to Sudan. Mr Kay (pictured below) arrived in Khartoum to take up his role as HM Ambassador to Sudan on 29 May 2010. Here is a copy of his first two blog posts followed by several related reports.

Full story: https://sudanwatch.blogspot.com/2010/11/british-ambassador-in-khartoum-nicholas.html

_____________

Sir Nicholas Kay KCMG
British Ambassador to the Republic of Sudan 2010 to 2012
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/nicholas-kay

_____________

End