The United Nations Human Rights Council adopted a resolution Friday mandating an independent investigation into alleged mass atrocities in El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, where paramilitary Rapid Support Forces stand accused of systematic killings and human rights violations. The decision represents a significant escalation in international scrutiny of Sudan's 20-month civil war, though questions remain about the mission's ability to access the besieged city and compel accountability.
El Fasher has emerged as a critical flashpoint in Sudan's conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF. The city, home to approximately 1.8 million people including hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians, has been under RSF siege for months, with reports of indiscriminate shelling, targeted killings, and widespread sexual violence. The UN resolution signals growing international alarm over what human rights organizations describe as a "catastrophic humanitarian situation" marked by deliberate violence against civilians.
The strategic significance of El Fasher
Following the RSF's capture of El Fasher in late October 2025 after an 18-month siege, the city represents a strategically vital and symbolically important victory for the paramilitary group. The city's fall completed the RSF's territorial dominance across Sudan's vast western region, fundamentally altering the conflict's balance of power. For the RSF, which evolved from the notorious Janjaweed militia responsible for genocide in Darfur two decades ago, capturing El Fasher consolidated a contiguous zone of control stretching across Darfur. The capture was highly significant because it ended the Sudanese Armed Forces' presence in Darfur and was followed by atrocities attributed to RSF forces.
The city's defense had included not just Sudanese Armed Forces units but also various armed movements and community defense groups, creating a complex military landscape. This coalition attempted to prevent RSF advances, but at tremendous cost to the civilian population trapped within the siege perimeter. Humanitarian access remains severely restricted, with aid organizations unable to reach those in desperate need of food, medicine, and protection.
Members are reading: An examination of why UN investigations struggle to prevent atrocities in real-time and what mechanisms might actually influence actors in Sudan's conflict.
The regional dimension and external actors
Sudan's civil war continues partly because regional powers pursue competing interests through proxy support. The UAE has faced persistent accusations of supplying weapons to the RSF, while Egypt maintains close ties to Sudan's military government. Saudi Arabia and the United States have attempted mediation through the Jeddah platform, but talks have repeatedly collapsed without achieving meaningful humanitarian access or protection commitments.
The UN resolution implicitly challenges these external actors by increasing the reputational costs of continued involvement. If investigators document specific weapon systems used in atrocities, tracing supply chains becomes possible, potentially complicating relationships between RSF backers and Western partners. However, such diplomatic pressure operates on timelines measured in months or years, while El Fasher's crisis unfolds in days and weeks.
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.
