By Darius Spearman (africanelements)

Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.

In late December 2025, a critical diplomatic battle unfolded in Cairo, Egypt. During the Second Ministerial Conference of the Russia-Africa Partnership Forum, Sudanese officials made a desperate appeal to the international community. Their goal was specific and urgent. They urged African and Russian counterparts to officially designate the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) as a terrorist group (chron.com). This move represents a significant escalation in the diplomatic war that runs parallel to the bloody combat on the ground.

While government officials in suits debated legal definitions in Cairo, the situation inside Sudan remained catastrophic. The Sudanese diaspora and humanitarian groups continued to push for immediate physical solutions rather than just political labels. Their primary demand remains the establishment of safe food corridors to prevent mass starvation (emergencyalliance.org.nz). This contrast between high-level diplomatic maneuvering and grassroots survival strategies highlights the complex tragedy unfolding in the region.

The conflict in Sudan has deep historical roots that go beyond the current headlines. It involves a struggle for power, resources, and identity that has fractured the nation. Understanding the history behind the headlines requires looking at how a militia once armed by the state turned against it, and how civilians are caught in the crossfire. The call for a terrorist designation is not merely a legal strategy; it is a bid to delegitimize the enemy totally. Meanwhile, the people of Sudan face what the United Nations calls one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent history (un.org).

The meeting in Cairo served as a strategic platform for the Sudanese government based in Port Sudan. The delegation, led by high-ranking officials, utilized the Russia-Africa forum to present their case against the RSF. Dr. Lamia Abdel Ghaffar, a key figure in the delegation, accused the RSF of committing heinous crimes against civilians and destroying state infrastructure (chron.com). The government argues that labeling the RSF as a terrorist organization would criminalize any international support the group receives. This is particularly relevant regarding accusations that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) provides material support to the RSF, a claim the UAE denies (chron.com).

Russia's involvement in this forum is significant. As the administration of President Donald Trump navigates a complex "America First" foreign policy, Russia has continued to expand its influence across the African continent. Sudan is leveraging this by appealing to Moscow for political backing. The Sudanese government hopes that Russian support will counter Western hesitancy. Western nations have often pushed for negotiations that treat both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the RSF as legitimate warring parties. The government in Port Sudan rejects this moral equivalence, viewing the RSF strictly as a rebel militia (africainfact.com).

The terror designation would legally block the RSF from accessing international financial systems. It would also make it illegal for other nations or entities to engage with them. However, humanitarian organizations warn that such a label could complicate aid delivery. If the RSF is designated as a terrorist group, aid workers operating in RSF-controlled areas could face prosecution for "material support" simply for paying road tolls or coordinating food deliveries (brookings.edu). This creates a tension between the government's military strategy and the immediate needs of the population.

To understand the ferocity of the current war, one must look at the origin of the combatants. The RSF was not created overnight. It traces its lineage directly to the Janjaweed militias of the early 2000s. During the conflict in Darfur, the former dictator Omar al-Bashir mobilized Arab pastoralist tribes to crush rebellions led by non-Arab farming communities (okayafrica.com). These militias were accused of genocide and ethnic cleansing. In 2013, the state formalized these groups into the Rapid Support Forces to protect the regime from coup attempts.

The leader of the RSF, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, rose from being a militia commander to becoming one of the most powerful men in Sudan. The current war began when the alliance between Hemedti and the army chief, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, collapsed. They had worked together to oust al-Bashir in 2019 and again to stage a coup in 2021. However, the plan to integrate the RSF into the regular army threatened Hemedti's power base, triggering the conflict in April 2023 (okayafrica.com). The violence has now ravaged the capital, Khartoum, and reignited ethnic slaughter in Darfur.

This history explains why the "terrorist" label is so charged. For many victims in Darfur, the RSF has always been a terror group. The militia's tactics include burning villages, sexual violence, and targeted assassinations based on ethnicity. The current push by the SAF to apply this label globally is an attempt to use international law to finish a battle they created by empowering the militia in the first place. This cycle of violence mirrors the historical and cultural impact of state-sponsored violence seen in other contexts.

While the designation debate continues, the physical reality for millions of Sudanese is a lack of food. The conflict has severed supply chains and destroyed markets. Aid agencies and diaspora groups are laser-focused on opening "food corridors." These are safe routes that allow humanitarian convoys to pass through frontlines without being attacked. The most critical of these is the Adre crossing on the border with Chad. Aid groups have fought hard to keep this route open to deliver supplies to Darfur (emergencyalliance.org.nz).

The SAF government has at times restricted access to these corridors. Officials fear that food aid sent to RSF-controlled areas will end up feeding enemy fighters rather than civilians. Conversely, the RSF has been accused of looting aid warehouses and trucks. This weaponization of hunger has led to famine conditions. In the Zamzam displacement camp, experts confirmed that famine thresholds had been passed, meaning people are dying of starvation daily (un.org). The demand for guaranteed corridors is a demand for the basic right to life.

The Sudanese diaspora has stepped in where international systems have failed. Using mobile banking apps, Sudanese living abroad send funds directly to "Emergency Response Rooms" (ERRs) inside the country. These youth-led volunteer groups run communal kitchens and buy medical supplies on the local market (tadamun.de). The push for corridors is vital because money alone cannot buy food if no trucks can enter the besieged cities. The diaspora's advocacy highlights the strength and resilience of families who refuse to abandon their kin.

The war in Sudan is also a war over resources. The RSF controls the majority of the country's gold mines, particularly in the Jebel Amer region of Darfur. This gold wealth allows Hemedti to pay his soldiers and purchase advanced weaponry, making the militia financially independent of the state (trendsnafrica.com). Investigations have shown that this gold often leaves the country via the UAE, integrating Sudan's conflict into the global economy (chron.com).

Russia's interest in the region is linked to this resource extraction. The Wagner Group, now operating under the umbrella of the Russian Ministry of Defense as the Africa Corps, has provided training and equipment to the RSF in exchange for access to gold. This gold helps Russia mitigate the impact of Western sanctions. The dynamic creates a vicious cycle where Sudan's natural wealth funds its own destruction. This exploitation of labor and resources mirrors how Black workers fought for economic justice against systems designed to extract value from them without fair compensation.

The involvement of external powers complicates the peace process. If the RSF is labeled a terrorist group, it disrupts the gold trade networks that benefit these foreign actors. Therefore, the diplomatic push by the Sudanese government in Cairo is also a move to force Russia to choose a side. By aligning with the SAF, Russia would secure access to Port Sudan on the Red Sea, a strategic prize for its navy. The people of Sudan are caught between these geopolitical ambitions.

The crisis in Sudan poses a challenge to Pan-African solidarity. The African Union (AU) has suspended Sudan's membership until civilian rule is restored, but it lacks the enforcement power to stop the war. Civil society groups across the continent and the Diaspora are calling for "African solutions to African problems." This means rejecting the proxy war dynamics driven by the UAE, Russia, and others. It involves supporting the grassroots Resistance Committees that are effectively governing their communities in the absence of the state (sandiego.edu).

For African Americans and the global Black community, the situation in Sudan resonates with the sharing of power and the struggle against systemic oppression. The targeting of the Masalit people in West Darfur is a stark reminder that anti-Black racism can exist even within the African continent, weaponized by Arab supremacist ideologies adopted by the RSF (okayafrica.com). Solidarity requires amplifying the voices of those on the ground who are demanding both protection from violence and the right to feed their families.

As the conflict drags on, the international community faces a choice. They can continue to treat the situation as a dispute between two generals, or they can listen to the civilians. The push for a terrorist designation may squeeze the RSF's finances, but without opened food corridors and guaranteed protection for aid workers, the people will continue to suffer. The history behind the headlines shows that legal labels are not enough; only a concerted global effort to starve the war machine—rather than the people—can bring peace.

Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.