Mercenaries: The Hands of Destruction

By Dr Inas Mohamed Ahmed
The phenomenon of using mercenaries in warfare is not a recent one—it has deep historical roots, dating back to times when standing armies did not yet exist. Throughout history, societies have either embraced or rejected the use of mercenaries. However, by the time of the French Revolution in 1789, public disdain for them had grown so severe that signs reading “No Entry for Mercenaries” were hung on restaurant and hotel doors. Their irresponsible conduct had rendered them undesirable and distrusted.
By the late 20th century, mercenarism had evolved into a professional “career” of sorts—one that attracted individuals driven by greed, the pursuit of looted wealth, and profit at any cost.
A mercenary, by definition, is a person who engages in hostile activity in exchange for payment. They have no allegiance, affiliation, or stake in the conflict—their only motive is financial gain.
Mercenaries and International Law
International law does not grant mercenaries the legal status of “combatants,” nor do they qualify for the protections afforded to prisoners of war. A mercenary is someone recruited for the sole purpose of fighting—often to topple governments, destabilise constitutional regimes, or aid rebellion for material gain.
Recognising the danger posed by mercenaries, African leaders ratified the Organisation of African Unity Convention for the Elimination of Mercenarism in Africa in Gabon (1977), which came into force in April 1985.
Globally, Article 47 of Protocol I, additional to the Geneva Conventions (1977) states clearly:
“A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or prisoner of war. A mercenary is recruited to fight in an armed conflict for private gain, is not a national of any party to the conflict, is not a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict, and is not sent on official duty by a non-party state.”
In 1989, the International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries was adopted. This convention aligns with the African treaty and extends its scope:
Article 2 declares that anyone who recruits, finances, trains, or uses mercenaries as defined, commits a criminal offence.
It also criminalises any direct participation in hostilities or any attempt to commit acts of war on behalf of mercenary interests.
Importantly, even attempting to commit such acts is in itself a punishable offence. The convention further clarifies that mercenaries who participate directly in war crimes or who even attempt to do so are subject to international prosecution.
This convention, alongside the UN Charter (which prohibits the use of force against the sovereignty or political independence of states) and the Geneva Conventions, denies mercenaries recognition as lawful combatants and holds them accountable for the international crimes they commit.
The UAE’s Role in Supporting Mercenaries
All of the above makes the use of mercenaries in Sudan—whether Colombian or African—and the importation of such forces by the UAE, a clear violation of international law.
One must ask: when will this so-called “Rogue State” realise that no matter how many mercenaries it amasses—whether from Latin America or Africa—no matter how many weapons and ammunition it supplies, even advanced weaponry, it will never take an inch of our homeland?
In early 2025, Amnesty International released a report accusing the United Arab Emirates of supplying the terrorist militia in Sudan with advanced Chinese weaponry—including guided GB50A bombs, 155mm AH-4 howitzers, and other field artillery, spotted in both Khartoum and Darfur. This represents a blatant violation of the arms embargo imposed on Darfur since 2004.
Following the liberation of Khartoum from the militia, analysis of remnants and attack patterns—conducted by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)—confirmed that the UAE was the sole importer of these weapons, later re-exporting them to the militia.
This is not the first time the UAE has been implicated in arming militias or recruiting mercenaries from Colombia and neighbouring African states. But it is the first time credible evidence—including documentation and imagery—has substantiated these allegations, placing Abu Dhabi’s regime under serious suspicion of financing and facilitating terrorism.
Sudan Strikes Back
Despite its ongoing support for the militia, the UAE received a blunt message from Sudan’s Air Force this time. In a precision airstrike on Wednesday, Sudanese fighter jets targeted a private aircraft that had just landed at Nyala Airport, South Darfur, resulting in the immediate death of several Colombian mercenaries on board.
The aircraft was reportedly tracked from its departure at a Gulf-region airbase.
The Regional Threat of Mercenaries
The mercenary threat is not confined to Sudan. The presence of thousands of foreign fighters represents a grave danger to all neighbouring countries, especially those grappling with internal unrest, armed movements, or fragile security structures. These mercenaries could easily become the spark that ignites wider regional conflict.
But no matter how many mercenaries the rogue state sends, no matter how many weapons it pumps into the hands of its proxy militias, they will never break the will of a free people—a nation whose civilisation spans more than seven millennia.
We are the people who initiated history, we are the people who make history, and we are the ones writing it now. And those who oppose us—even if their entire historical footprint fits in two lines of a dusty book—should study ours well.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=6867