Between Reconstruction and Disruption: Sudan’s Struggle Against Coordinated Attacks

The recent wave of coordinated attacks targeting civilian sites in the national capital and other Sudanese cities must be viewed within its broader strategic context. These operations appear deliberately designed to undermine the accelerating restoration of normal life across Sudan—a recovery that had begun to gather tangible momentum in recent months. This trajectory is reflected in reports by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which indicate that nearly four million displaced persons and refugees have already returned to their areas of origin, while millions more stand on the threshold of return, preparing to reclaim their homes and rebuild their lives.

The significance of this dignified return of displaced persons and refugees represents, in itself, a major setback to systematic efforts at demographic manipulation of the Sudan by aggressor forces, which appear to align with long-standing colonial-era strategies aimed at undermining Sudan’s unity and fragmenting its social fabric.

In contrast, the security and humanitarian situation in areas under militia control continues to deteriorate and escalate. Large numbers of civilians are fleeing violence, repression, and insecurity, either to neighbouring countries or toward areas under the control of the Sudanese Armed Forces. The defection of the third most senior and influential militia leader, one of its founding figures, and his return to the national fold, further underscores the deepening internal fractures within the group and reflects a rapidly evolving situation on the ground.

From a military perspective, the increasing reliance on drone strikes signals a clear shift in the militia’s tactics : At the outset of its coup against legitimate authority, and at the height of its strength, the militia relied on wide deployment, heavy firepower, and territorial control. Today however, thanks to the professionalism of the Sudanese Armed Forces, including long-range attrition tactics and the precise targeting of objectives, the militia is no longer able to sustain that model. Instead, it has resorted to drone warfare as a last alternative.

Furthermore, the escalation of attacks at this stage appears closely linked to mounting pressure on the militia following a series of military and political setbacks. Amid a troubling silence and obfuscation from regional and international institutions, there are increasing indications that the militia’s backers have intensified the recruitment of mercenaries from neighboring countries and the use of their territories as launch platforms for drone operations, in blatant violation of Sudan’s sovereignty and the principles of good neighborliness, once again highlighting the regional dimension of this conflict.

The attacks have focused on power stations, the airport, and key economic facilities such as the Kenana Sugar Factory—one of the largest producers of sugar and ethanol in the region. Targeting such infrastructure is not limited to causing immediate damage; rather, it represents a deliberate attempt to obstruct economic recovery and prevent the restoration of essential services, thereby hindering voluntary return operations for citizens, as previously noted.

In response, the Government of Sudan continues to intensify efforts to protect strategic sites and mitigate the impact of such attacks. However, absolute protection remains difficult in the context of modern warfare. The ongoing Russia–Ukraine war provides a clear example, demonstrating how drone capabilities can reach even the most secured locations, including areas near the Kremlin in central Moscow.

These attacks will not weaken the resolve of the Sudanese people, who have rallied in an unprecedented manner behind their armed forces and national institutions. Over time, they have developed greater capacity for resilience and determination to confront this militia, viewing it as nothing more than a cat’s paw for external powers seeking to exploit and plunder Sudan’s resources, as is the case in other parts of Africa.

In conclusion, as noted by Commander Mustafa Tambour, the objective of these drone strikes is to instill fear among civilians and deter their return to their historic capital, Khartoum. Yet, this approach continues to misread a fundamental reality: the Sudanese people cannot be subdued. These threats will not intimidate them, and the process of return, reconstruction, and national recovery will move forward despite all challenges.

   Comments0