The United Nations Security Council has failed to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Sudan despite months of warnings, a senior UN official declared Thursday, as international condemnation mounted following reports that paramilitary forces massacred 460 people at a maternity hospital in el-Fasher.
Thank you for reading this post; don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel here!
UN Assistant Secretary-General for Africa, Martha Amaa Akyaa Pobee, delivered the sharp rebuke during an emergency Security Council meeting convened at the request of the UK, Denmark, and rotating African members after the fall of el-Fasher, the last major government stronghold in Darfur.
“Reports and warnings about the unfolding catastrophe in el-Fasher have been issued for months,” Pobee stated. “Thus far, the United Nations Security Council has not taken decisive action to prevent the situation from deteriorating.” She called on the body to “use all the tools at its disposal to demand peace in Sudan.”
Her criticism came as UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres issued his own statement expressing grave concern about military escalation in el-Fasher, calling for “an immediate end to the siege and hostilities” after the World Health Organization condemned the reported hospital killings by the Rapid Support Forces militia.
The Security Council eventually issued a statement voicing “grave concern” about the situation in North Darfur and el-Fasher, denouncing “reported atrocities being perpetrated by the RSF against the civilian population, including summary executions and arbitrary detentions,” and demanding perpetrators be held accountable.
However, Sudan’s Ambassador to the EU, Aldelbagi Kabeir, speaking in Brussels on Thursday, dismissed similar European responses as inadequate. The EU statement on the conflict was “way below our expectations,” Kabeir declared, calling for concrete actions rather than expressions of concern.
The ambassador outlined specific demands: pressure on regional and international sponsors of the militias, enforcement of a 2004 UN embargo on weapons exports to Darfur, achievement of “international justice to end the impunity,” and designation of RSF militias as a terrorist entity.
The RSF’s capture of el-Fasher after an 18-month siege has eliminated the final significant resistance to militia control across Darfur. The paramilitary force now controls most of western Sudan, while the country’s military holds most northern and eastern territories.
The conflict has effectively partitioned Sudan, with the army having regained full control of the capital Khartoum in March, while the RSF established a parallel administration in the southwestern city of Nyala, creating competing governance structures that formalise the country’s division.
The RSF traces its origins to the Janjaweed militia responsible for atrocities targeting non-Arab communities in Darfur two decades ago. Observers allege the group continues pursuing ethnic cleansing of populations, including the Fur and Zaghawa peoples, suggesting continuity between past genocidal campaigns and current military operations.
The reported maternity hospital massacre, involving 460 deaths according to WHO accounts, follows this pattern of targeting civilian populations and infrastructure, raising questions about whether international legal frameworks defining war crimes and crimes against humanity apply to RSF actions.
International frustration extends beyond UN deliberations. Kabeir’s Brussels remarks highlight perceptions that Western powers, despite rhetorical condemnation, have failed to deploy economic, diplomatic, or legal tools that might constrain militia operations or their external supporters.
His specific reference to enforcing the 2004 UN weapons embargo acknowledges an uncomfortable reality: the embargo exists, but it lacks meaningful implementation mechanisms, allowing arms flows to continue fueling the conflict despite nominal international prohibitions.
The call for terrorist designation of the RSF would trigger automatic sanctions, financial restrictions, and legal consequences under counterterrorism frameworks that might prove more effective than humanitarian law mechanisms that have produced statements but not behavioural changes.
Pobee’s public criticism of Security Council inaction represents unusual candour from a UN official, typically constrained by diplomatic protocols from directly challenging the body’s most powerful organ. Her willingness to speak bluntly suggests frustration within the UN system about political paralysis while humanitarian catastrophe unfolds.
The emergency session’s scheduling—pulled forward at member state request—is recognition that el-Fasher’s fall represents an inflexion point potentially accelerating ethnic cleansing, population displacement, and humanitarian crisis beyond already severe levels affecting millions of Sudanese.
However, the gap between emergency meetings producing concern statements and concrete actions changing ground realities reflects the international community’s limited leverage or political will to meaningfully intervene in Sudan’s civil war, leaving civilian populations vulnerable to reported atrocities while diplomatic processes generate documentation rather than protection.
Sudan’s descent into what Pobee characterised as a preventable catastrophe raises fundamental questions about international conflict prevention mechanisms, the gap between early warning systems that functioned correctly and response systems that failed to act, and whether current international architecture can effectively address civil wars where major powers lack a strategic interest compelling intervention.
Follow the AkweyaTV channel on WhatsApp: http://bit.ly/3I7mQVx
Or scan the QR code:
