International Crimes in Sudan: Statute of Limitation Not Applicable

By Mahmoud Hussein Sirri

In September 2022, during a speech at the army’s commemoration of the 124th anniversary of the Battle of Karari between British Army and Sudanese Mahdist forces, Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan demanded that Britain issue a formal apology for the “colonial crime”committed. Al-Burhan stated that the actions of the British army constituted a crime against humanity, for which the perpetrators deserved to be held accountable, as they committed killings and atrocities for 4 days after the battle.

Al-Burhan may have been attempting to express his rejection of the British role in the Sudanese crisis, suggesting that those who killed our ancestors yesterday are the same ones now calling for the International Criminal Court, international sanctions, the isolation of Sudan, questioning of its army, and the dismantling and dividing of the country. Any political party, national leader, human rights activists, or national association could have seized upon al-Burhan’s message and begin gathering evidence to prosecute Britain, as many countries in the region and the world have done, using it as leverage against an international community that seems adept only at pressuring Sudan. However, it appears that Sudanese political parties and civil society organizations are dead and fast asleep.

The mass demonstrations and sit-ins organized by Sudanese communities in European capitals—at the Place de la Bastille in Paris, in Berlin, in Washington, D.C., London, and in other Western cities—in November 2025 helped bring the war in Sudan into sharp focus. In these protests, Sudanese expatriates and activists held demonstrations in front of Western countries ministries and European institutions in various capitals, demanding an end to the “genocide” in Darfur perpetrated by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

The demonstrators focused on calling on European governments and the international community to assume their responsibilities and pressure the parties to the conflict (especially the RSF, which was besieging the city of El-Fasher) to open safe corridors for civilians and allow the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

These demonstrations had a greater impact than any action taken by a political party, political group, Sudanese government, or even the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, official Sudanese institutions, or Sudanese media outlets.

These demonstrations, sit-ins, and social media campaigns have changed the perception of European and American citizens regarding the situation in Sudan. They have placed Western governments in a position of embarrassment, political pressure, and a moral dilemma, exposing the hypocrisy of the values these countries espouse.

This has created a predicament for European and American foreign policy in its handling of crises and raised questions about the ability of regional, international, and diplomatic institutions to address the Sudanese issue.

The response was unexpected. For the first time since the outbreak of the war, the European Union, with its 27 member states, declared that the actions of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), its military ally in Sudan, to be “atrocities,” and considered the RSF’s capture of El Fasher a “dangerous turning point” in the war.

The European Parliament held a public hearing to discuss the humanitarian catastrophe and the human rights situation in Sudan. The European Union, its 27 member states, and the United States supported an investigation by the International Criminal Court into the crimes committed. The Council of Foreign Ministers of the 27 European Union member states held two meetings on Sudan for the first time since the outbreak of the war. European officials were summoned to European parliaments and criticized for their shameful silence regarding the crimes and atrocities committed in El Fasher against innocent civilians, particularly the stories of women and children.

The US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, delivered a powerful statement, accusing the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) of committing atrocities and grave human rights violations in Sudan, including rape and crimes against children. He hinted that designating the RSF as a terrorist organization was a possibility and stated that US President Donald Trump was personally involved in the Sudanese conflict and considered him the only leader capable of ending the crisis.

The lesson learned here is that the popular demonstrations, civil protests, and social media campaigns by Sudanese people and those sympathetic to their cause have borne fruit. These demonstrations must not end, the protests must not cease, and the campaigns must not be interrupted. On the contrary, they must increase and continue, as they are a means of independent, peaceful expression that exposes the crimes of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and their affiliated political bases within Sudan, the region, and the international community, including international organizations, institutions, and officials who avoid speaking the truth about what is happening in Sudan.

These protests must continue, the demonstrations must be ongoing, and the media campaigns must persist because they will open a door and a window for the Sudanese government and army to pressure the international community to end the war.

These popular protests and media campaigns must not only focus on exposing the crimes, atrocities, and violations of the RSF, but must also extend to exposing the financial and military support, as well as the regional and international complicity in the silence surrounding what is happening in Sudan. Silence regarding the atrocities committed against innocent people in Sudan is a crime. Silence regarding the RSF’s actions and their massacres is a crime. The silence regarding the support from the UAE and neighboring countries is a crime. Regional and international inaction is a crime. These popular protests, media campaigns, and demonstrations must expose the crimes of the Europeans and the United States, which continue to this day, albeit in different forms.

The European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, and other European countries that pursue the Sudanese army—the official state institution—and defend the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which are rebelling against the state, through resolutions, sessions, and meetings of condemnation and smear campaigns, working to delegitimize and isolate the army, are the same ones that funded the office of the president of the…

Former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok secured euros 11 million from the European Union’s Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (EFTF) for a project ostensibly aimed at addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displacement in Africa, promoting development, good governance, and access to peace and justice.

In reality, this project amounted to millions of euros in monthly salaries for advisors who undermined the transitional period, brought the country to its knees, ignited the current war in Sudan, and facilitated the UN’s Volker Mission, which drafted the framework agreement that led to this disastrous conflict. The objective of this project, which must be revisited and its repercussions exposed, is to control, subjugate, and dominate Sudan. Countries, governments, and diplomats from the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States are partners in its planning, implementation, and funding. They gathered official information about Sudan from the Prime Minister’s office. This requires that any future national government, along with patriotic judges and political leaders who truly care about Sudan, prioritize, now rather than later, launching an investigation into this catastrophe and holding those responsible accountable to prevent a recurrence of such scenarios.

The crimes of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union in Sudan did not stop there. They continued with non-European actors to control migration flows and prevent migrants from leaving Africa for decades. The European Union and its member states sought to cooperate with the rebel leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo and his terrorist and repressive forces by funding Sudan through various agreements, funds, and programs aimed at controlling migration—and thus strengthening and developing the Rapid Support Forces’ power. Does the Sudanese government, its security apparatus, and its national army have any information regarding this?

Many Sudanese civil society leaders, in their meetings with European and Western missions, pointed to their clear role in framing, strengthening, and empowering the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan. They told them that the funding, weapons, and recognition they provided—including the elevation of Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo to the highest echelons of power—enabled him to use these resources to repress and terrorize Sudanese citizens and civilian protesters.

The negative roles played by the British envoy Richard Crowder, the US envoy Massad Boulos, and the EU envoy for the Horn of Africa Annette Weber in Sudan continue unabated. Their meetings with advisors to the RSF commander are ongoing and are held in various African countries. Can these Western envoys explain where the funds allocated for combating migration have gone? Sudan, ranked fourth in the Horn of Africa, has benefited from euros 500 million of the euros 2 billion allocated for migration control.

The crimes of the Europeans, the United States, and the United Kingdom have not ceased; they continue today through the politicization of the Sudanese humanitarian crisis. So where do the millions of euros pledged by these countries for humanitarian aid to Sudan go?

On International Human Rights Day in 2022, the former EU Ambassador, Aidan O’Hara, announced from within the EU headquarters in the heart of Khartoum, just steps away from the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a financial package of 15 million euros. Of this, 5 million euros were allocated to support human rights in Sudan, another 5 million to support the rule of law, provide social services for detainees, and offer legal aid to prisoners. The remaining 5 million euros were designated to support young people aspiring to democratic transition, peace, and civic empowerment. So where did this money go?

Of course, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was not invited to the ceremony, nor did it take any action to summon the ambassador for consultations regarding how these funds were disbursed, their channels, and the monitoring of their intended purpose. The matter was simply ignored in Sudanese newspaper headlines. This money was spent on “civil society organizations,” which emerged amidst the chaos of the counter-revolution, the security breakdown, and the ongoing civil war.

The aim of this article is twofold: First, to urge the national government in Port Sudan to launch an official investigation into development projects funded and organized by the United Kingdom, the United States, the European Union, and other European countries in support of Hamdok’s office, migration projects, and civil society organizations. Second, to establish new diplomatic, civil, and legal controls that respect Sudanese sovereignty and require the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, its embassies, the Ministries of Finance, Justice, and International Cooperation, the Humanitarian Aid Commission, and the security and military apparatuses to rise to the level of national responsibility and work diligently to control international aid funds that have contributed to this war.

The coming period is crucial for confronting Western diplomats and raising awareness among the Sudanese people and their political leaders about these matters, these facts, accusations, and the misuse of international aid funds in our country, which have been used to fragment societies, spread hatred, deepen wounds, exacerbate divisions, and ignite wars.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=9529