Fragmented Ties and International Responsibility: Sudan’s Turmoil and the ICJ Legal Action Targeting the UAE

Khartoum – As the civil war continues to unfold since April 2023, Sudan’s military under General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan is facing increasing accusations of human rights violations and war crimes.

Instead of focusing on meaningful peace negotiations, the military seems focused on shifting its domestic crises outward – stoking tensions with neighboring nations and launching a contentious lawsuit against the United Arab Emirates in the International Court of Justice.

This lawsuit, which charges Abu Dhabi with backing the Rapid Support Forces and being “complicit in genocide,” has sparked intense discussions – not only due to the lack of credible evidence but also because many Sudanese perceive it as a desperate tactic to divert attention from the military’s mishandling of a growing humanitarian emergency.

The Erosion of Sudan’s African Alliances

By using incendiary language and adopting an aggressive approach, Sudan’s military has significantly strained its relations with African neighbors, leading to a level of regional isolation unprecedented in recent history.

Relations with Chad deteriorated sharply after threats from high-ranking Sudanese military officials, chiefly Deputy Commander Yasser Atta, to strike Chadian airports with missiles, which Chad interpreted as a declaration of war.

In response, Chad partially closed its borders and increased security measures, expressing serious concern about the influx of both refugees and combatants.

Despite mediation attempts led by South Sudan, Khartoum accused Juba of aiding the RSF logistically, further aggravating tensions in a nation already grappling with internal turmoil.

The Sudanese administration also made vague accusations against Kenya and Uganda for alleged interference following their calls for inclusive negotiations.

These unsubstantiated claims only served to widen diplomatic divides.

Sudanese allegations regarding the supposed arrival of fighters from the Central African Republic were met with a swift rebuke from Bangui, which dismissed the claims as fabricated and accused Khartoum of inventing external scapegoats to distract from its domestic failures.

This increasingly aggressive stance has resulted in the loss of valuable regional allies for Sudan, worsening an already critical humanitarian situation.

With millions of displaced Sudanese depending on neighboring countries for shelter and food, the collapse of these alliances has dire human implications.

A Contentious Lawsuit Against the UAE

On Thursday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) commenced discussions on a case brought forward by the Sudanese military government against the United Arab Emirates.

The complaint alleges that Abu Dhabi violated the Genocide Convention by purportedly financing and supplying arms to the Rapid Support Forces.

Sudan is seeking provisional measures and reparations – demands that have been met with skepticism and, in some circles, outright mockery.

• Evidentiary Deficiencies: In the initial hearings, the Sudanese delegation seemed disorganized and ill-prepared, leaning heavily on broad accusations lacking in documentary support or compelling testimony. Legal experts like former Sudanese Justice Minister Nasredeen Abdulbari have labeled the case as “legally precarious and fundamentally unfounded.”
• Domestic Discontent: Abdulbari further condemned the lawsuit as “a grotesque act of hypocrisy by a military stained with the blood of its own people,” citing the army’s long history of abuse. Civil society groups such as “No to the Oppression of Women” called the lawsuit a cynical diversion from the military’s failure to protect civilians.

Abu Dhabi’s Unambiguous Rebuttal

The UAE responded promptly and decisively.

Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the president, dismissed the lawsuit as “absurd and a propagandist tactic,” reaffirming that the Emirates does not support any warring factions in Sudan.

Instead, he highlighted that the UAE remains devoted to humanitarian efforts, having provided over $1.8 billion in aid to Sudan since 2020, in alignment with international commitments.

A Legacy of Atrocities

The Sudanese military’s links to systematic violence extend far beyond the present conflict, encompassing decades of oppression:

• Darfur (2003–2020): The region experienced state-sponsored campaigns of ethnic cleansing resulting in over 300,000 deaths and millions displaced. A 2005 UN report classified these atrocities as war crimes and crimes against humanity.
• South Kordofan and Blue Nile (2011): Indiscriminate airstrikes by the military forced hundreds of thousands to flee to neighboring South Sudan and Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch noted deliberate assaults on civilian populations.
• The Present Conflict (2023–2025):
• Since hostilities erupted with the RSF, numerous war crimes attributed to the military have been recorded by the United Nations and human rights organizations such as Amnesty International:
  • Indiscriminate Bombardment: In April 2023, extensive aerial attacks led to mass civilian casualties. One of the most horrific incidents took place on March 26 near El Fasher, when barrel bombs struck a busy marketplace in Tura, resulting in nearly 1,500 civilian deaths, predominantly women and children, according to UN reports. Thirteen members of a single family were killed.
  • Use of Barrel Bombs: These unguided munitions, deployed recklessly in densely populated areas, have dire consequences. A resident of Omdurman recounted: “We were hiding in our homes, but the bombs do not distinguish between soldier and civilian.”
  • Extrajudicial Executions: Eyewitnesses from Wad Madani reported that, in December 2023, the army summarily executed dozens of civilians on suspicion of collaborating with the RSF—without trial or due process.

Famine and Aid Obstruction: A Deepening Catastrophe

Famine has surfaced as one of the most severe repercussions of the conflict, with over 25 million Sudanese facing critical food insecurity.

According to the United Nations, the military has imposed harsh limits on humanitarian aid deliveries, especially in areas controlled by the RSF.

In January 2025, Médecins Sans Frontières reported that the army’s obstruction of aid convoys resulted in thousands of children succumbing to malnutrition.

The international response was immediate.

UN humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths declared, “Blocking humanitarian aid during wartime is a crime against humanity.”

Weaponizing the Courts: A Deflection Strategy

Many analysts suggest that the lawsuit against the UAE is not a genuine legal effort but a strategic diversion by Sudan’s military to shift focus away from its own responsibilities:

• Rejection of Peace Initiatives: The army has consistently undermined peace talks – from the Jeddah negotiations to regional proposals by IGAD – consistently opting for military action over diplomacy.
• Obfuscating the Famine: Instead of enabling humanitarian access, the military has concentrated on blaming external factors, thereby worsening civilian suffering.

This approach of external antagonism seems aimed at diverting attention from credible international findings – including the October 2023 Fact-Finding Mission – that directly implicate the military in widespread war crimes.

Thus, the ICJ case emerges not as a pursuit of justice but as a reputational distraction.

Ultimately, Sudan’s military leadership has chosen to escalate external hostilities rather than confront the roots of its internal decline.

By antagonizing regional partners and pursuing a legally questionable case against the UAE, the regime demonstrates its desperation to change the narrative.

However, such tactics have only deepened domestic disenchantment and intensified international scrutiny.

While global concern grows, a lasting and peaceful resolution seems distant as long as the military continues down its path of deflection, oppression, and denial.