Sudan's Foreign Ministry has officially accused Ethiopia of permitting drones to launch from its territory to conduct strikes inside Sudan throughout February and early March 2026, marking the first time Khartoum has directly implicated its powerful neighbour in the three-year civil war. The formal diplomatic statement, issued March 2, represents a significant escalation in what has until now been a largely covert dimension of the conflict.
The accusation transforms Ethiopia's role from suspected facilitator to openly named participant in a war that has already displaced millions and fractured Sudan's state institutions. Khartoum has warned of consequences and reserved its right to respond, language that signals potential military escalation between two of the Horn of Africa's most significant military powers at a time when regional stability is already severely strained.
The covert infrastructure becomes public
The accusation does not emerge in a vacuum. Just weeks earlier, a February 2026 Reuters investigation documented the existence of a covert training facility in Ethiopia's Benishangul-Gumuz region, where the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) receive instruction and operational support financed by the United Arab Emirates. The revelation of this infrastructure—located near Sudan's border—provided the physical context for what Sudan now alleges: that Ethiopian territory serves as an active operational platform for attacks inside Sudan.
Drones have become one of the war's most devastating weapon systems, frequently deployed by the RSF to strike both military and civilian targets. A recent drone strike killed 24 displaced civilians in central Sudan, illustrating the weapon's deadly impact on non-combatants. By alleging these systems are being launched from Ethiopian soil, Sudan is asserting that Addis Ababa has moved beyond passive support to active participation in operations that routinely kill civilians.
Members are reading: Analysis of why this accusation collapses Ethiopia's neutrality fiction and raises immediate cross-border strike risks.
What happens next
Sudan's Foreign Ministry statement leaves little room for diplomatic ambiguity. By formally and publicly naming Ethiopia as the source of drone attacks, Khartoum has created a situation that requires response—either from Addis Ababa in the form of denial and counter-evidence, or from Sudan itself through military or diplomatic measures. The Sudanese Armed Forces, already locked in grinding combat with the RSF across multiple fronts, must now calculate whether they can afford to treat Ethiopian territory as hostile operational space. The international community, which has struggled to contain the Sudan conflict within its borders, now faces the prospect of a genuine interstate dimension that could destabilize the entire Horn of Africa region.
Subscribe to our free newsletter to unlock direct links to all sources used in this article.
We believe you deserve to verify everything we write. That's why we meticulously document every source.
