Leaked UN Report on UAE’s Involvement in the Sudanese War: Its Significance Lies in What It Fails to Mention

Sudanhorizon– Mohamed Osman Adam

A confidential report addressed to the UN Security Council, which was never officially published, has been leaked by employees within the international organization! It must be a truly interesting report. Its great importance lies not in revealing new information about the role the United Arab Emirates is allegedly playing in Sudan, or its support – whether material, media, political, or diplomatic – for the rebel Rapid Support Forces militias; all of this is already known, axiomatic and requiring no proof. Numerous factual reports—based on thorough and in-depth investigations by reputable media outlets such as the BBC, Associated Press, New York Times, Guardian, Reuters, and Middle East Eye, as well as Amnesty International, Politico, TV5 France, Le Monde, and many others—have documented this Emirati role, despite the UAE’s continued denials and rejections. This is to say nothing of reports from UN and human rights experts, the German Institute for International and Security Studies, and a long list of other sources.

The significance of this report stems from what might be considered its only weakness: its leakage (similar to a passive verb in Arabic where the subject is unknown, unspecified, or feared to be mentioned by name!!). This, however, is a serious leak from within the strong-coffers of the United Nations.

The international organization does not usually leak its reports unless it faces opposition from one of the permanent members of the Security Council (which possesses veto power). A leak might also occur—understandably—when one of these countries turns a blind eye to an issue or is preparing to take a specific action. In this case, the leak serves as a message: “What is stated in this report—or this event—is indeed true, but its official and public release might be met with a veto.” Another possibility is that the leak was intended to avoid embarrassment; countries like the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and even China—which have enormous economic ties with the UAE, where the UAE has invested trillions of dollars, not millions or billions—might be keen to avoid upsetting the UAE.

(As Middle East Eye (MEE) points out, “China is the UAE’s largest trading partner, and Russia has circumvented Western sanctions imposed after the Ukraine war through Dubai.”)

Therefore, the governments of these countries are expected to do their utmost to ensure their relations with the UAE remain untarnished. However, as they are mostly elected governments, they understand that the electoral cost and moral burden of continued silence would be substantial; thus, they may seek a way out: leaking information.

The reality is that any leak—even one originating from the Comoros Islands i.e. distance-wise from New York—can be easily traced and its source identified. Technically, this is quite simple, and it becomes even easier when the information is leaked to every conceivable media outlet.

Cameron Hudson put it this way: “It is clear at this point that the UN has leaked its highly confidential report on Sudan, detailing UAE’s direct involvement in support of the RSF, to every journalist with a pulse. Its quite a statement that UN staff are giving a big🖕to UAE while one of its chief diplomats is actively campaigning to lead the UN.”

The second interesting element is that the report was confidential; therefore, once leaked, it lost its confidentiality, meaning it will be published sooner or later, as it is now publicly available. This paves the way for certain actions, whether it be a moral rebuke, a means of exerting pressure, a signal to the UAE’s candidate to withdraw, pressure on Abu Dhabi to make concessions, or even a way to appease public anger and console Sudan before a potential agreement is reached.

International and regional media outlets, including those linked to intelligence circles, have confirmed that the leaked report (which has not yet been published in full) definitively proves, according to Middle East Eye, that the UAE employed Colombian mercenaries on behalf of the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.

The website emphasized that it had reviewed the “secret report” detailing the UAE’s involvement in the Sudanese war, asserting that UN investigators reached a “conclusive” conclusion that the UAE hired Colombian mercenaries to fight alongside the Sudanese Rapid Support Forces. The report, submitted to the UN Security Council last week and obtained by Middle East Eye, reveals details of how Global Security Services Group (GSSG), a UAE-based company with close ties to the government, transported Colombians to Sudan via Libya, Somalia, and Chad—areas where UAE-backed groups control significant territory.

UN investigators also explain that “the Puntland Maritime Police Force (PMPF) base—linked to the UAE—in Bosaso, Somalia, was used as a transit and/or training site for Colombian mercenaries before their deployment to Sudan.” The website notes—in a context unrelated to the above—that Middle East Eye and other media outlets have previously reported on the UAE and the Rapid Support Forces’ use of Colombian mercenaries, as well as their use of the ports of Bosaso and Berbera.

It is worth noting that the UN and the US have concluded that the Rapid Support Forces committed genocide in the Darfur region of western Sudan.

Weapons and other supplies were transported to the Rapid Support Forces by air and land, passing through the network controlled by the Haftar family and its militias in Libya, as well as through Ethiopia, Chad, and two breakaway regions in Somalia—Puntland and Somaliland—which have close ties to the UAE.

The UAE and other entities involved in this network have denied any wrongdoing. The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not respond to MEE’s request for comment on this article.

However, this report—the fourth quarterly update from the UN Panel of Experts on Sudan, which is classified as “top secret” and will not be made public—will be difficult for Abu Dhabi to escape. In a letter included in the leaked report, the UAE stated that it “rejects any allegations of wrongdoing in relation to the conflict in Sudan,” and affirmed that it “takes the allegations concerning mercenaries very seriously.”

However, the UN Panel of Experts report—according to the leaked document—emphasized that “Colombian mercenaries were trained and deployed through a network of facilities and transit routes encompassing the UAE, Somalia, eastern Libya, and Chad.”

The report also stated that these Colombian mercenaries “played a significant role in the Rapid Support Forces’ military operations in Darfur, particularly in the siege and capture of El Fasher.”

The report further indicated that “the mercenaries provided combat and technical support, including the operation of drones and the provision of artillery and infantry support,” reiterating that they “received training and were deployed through a network of facilities and transit routes encompassing the UAE, Somalia, eastern Libya, and Chad.”

According to UN investigators, these mercenaries were trained in Abu Dhabi, Ghayathi, and Al Wathba (all locations within the UAE), as well as at the Puntland Maritime Police Force (PMPF) base in Bosaso, located in the semi-autonomous region of Puntland in Somalia.

The report states that the UAE military funded, trained, and supervised the Puntland Maritime Police Force (PMPF). The report, as per published leaks, doesn’t use euphemisms like “may,” “alleged,” “believed,” or “could be”; it calls things by their names with absolute clarity- calls Spade a Spade- even though the document is still leaked. However, one thing is certain: the UAE candidate remains in the running, currently fifth in the race. She won’t withdraw voluntarily; she will ultimately have to be removed unless the five permanent members of the Security Council agree to nominate her as a replacement for UN Secretary-General António Guterres… who knows?!

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=20023