Sudan's RSF Declares a Truce, but Few Believe It
Sudan's Rapid Support Forces have announced acceptance of a humanitarian truce, but the declaration has been met with deep scepticism from analysts and human-rights organisations who see it as a tactical manoeuvre rather than a genuine step toward peace.
The truce was proposed by a group of outside mediators — the United States, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt — but the RSF offered no clear plan for how it would be implemented. Observers warn the paramilitary force, under intense global criticism, may be seeking to use any pause to consolidate its gains rather than to halt the war.
That criticism has been sharpened by events in El Fasher, the North Darfur city where Amnesty International says the RSF committed crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing during its campaign to seize the area. The organisation has called for an immediate ceasefire and the deployment of an international force to protect civilians.
The human cost of the conflict has continued to mount. The UN's human-rights chief has said drone strikes alone killed more than a thousand Sudanese civilians in the first five months of 2026, reflecting the growing use of such weapons by both the RSF and the rival Sudanese Armed Forces.
With mediation stalled and both sides still armed and funded by outside actors, a durable end to Sudan's catastrophe remains elusive. For the civilians caught between the warring camps, a truce that exists only on paper offers little protection.
