US and UN should impose more sanctions on Sudanese leaders for alleged atrocities, rights group says

Aug 4, 2023

A leading human rights group has called on the United States and the United Nations to impose more sanctions on the Sudanese leaders responsible for the ongoing atrocities in Darfur

CAIRO (AP) — A leading human rights group called Friday on the United States and the United Nations to impose further sanctions on those in Sudan "responsible for the atrocities" in the troubled Darfur region, where evidence of scorched-earth attacks is mounting.

The northeast African country plunged into chaos in April when monthslong tensions between the military, led by Abdel Fattah Burhan, and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, commanded by Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, exploded into open fighting in the capital of Khartoum, and elsewhere. In Darfur, the scene of

genocidal war in the early 2000s

, the conflict has morphed into ethnic violence, with the RSF and allied Arab militias targeting African communities in the western region, U.N. officials say.

In a press release, Human Rights Watch said Washington should impose targeted sanctions to "ensure that the U.N. Security Council finally acts to protect civilians and to hold those responsible for the atrocities to account.” The U.S. is set to take over the presidency of the U.N. Security Council later this month.

The New York-based watchdog group said at least seven villages and towns have been almost completely burned to the ground or destroyed in West Darfur alone, according to satellite footage and testimonies analyzed by the group. These include Habilla Kanari, Mejmere, Misterei, Molle, Murnei, Gokor, and Sirba.

“The world should not stand by as town after town in West Darfur is burned to the ground, sending tens of thousands of civilians fleeing for their lives,” said Tirana Hassan, executive director at HRW.

In June, the

U.S. imposed sanctions

against four key companies either linked to or owned by the warring factions. The White House also placed visa restrictions on army and RSF officials, and leaders from the former government led by ousted President Omar al-Bashir. It did note specify which individuals were affected.

Al-Bashir, who ruled Sudan for more than 30 years, is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of war crimes and genocide linked to the Darfur conflict.

Later Friday, the U.S., Britain and Norway called in a joint statement for an end to the bloodshed in Darfur. The three countries condemned the ongoing violence, “especially reports of killings based on ethnicity and widespread sexual violence by the Rapid Support Forces" and allied militias.

Since the latest fighting erupted in mid-April, there have been at least nine temporary cease-fire agreements between the military and the RSF, most of which were brokered by Washington and Riyadh during cross party talks in the Saudi coastal city of Jeddah. However, all the truces foundered.

Last Month, Karim Khan, a prosecutor from the ICC, told the United Nations that he would be

investigating alleged new war crimes

and crimes against humanity committed in Darfur.

Earlier this week, Amnesty International separately accused both warring parties of committing extensive war crimes, including deliberate killings of civilians and mass sexual assault. Amnesty said almost all rape cases were blamed on the RSF and its allied Arab militias.

In its 56-page report, HRW said the RSF abducted 24 women and girls — some as young as 12 — and held them “for several days during which they were raped by several RSF members."

The now nearly four-month conflict in Sudan has killed more than 3,000 people and wounded more than 6,000 others, according to the last government figures, released in June. The true tally is likely much higher, according to doctors and activists.

Meanwhile, the fighting has forced 4 million people to flee their homes either to safer areas inside Sudan or to neighboring countries, according to figures from the U.N. migration agency.

The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, or FAO, said on Thursday that 20.3 million people in the country now “face severe hunger,” double the number from the same time last year.

More News

The far-right just lost. Twice.

Oct 26, 2026

The far-right just lost. Twice.

Supporters of Serbia’s Students’ List movement celebrate in Belgrade on October 26, 2026. | Milos Milanovic/AFP via Getty Images This story appeared in Today, Explained, a daily newsletter that helps you understand the most compelling news and stories of the day. Subscribe here. Vox isn’t typically in the business of covering elections in far-flung locales like the central Balkans. (No offense whatsoever to anyone from the central Balkans!) But on Sunday, an insurgent student-backed movement in Serbia successfully toppled the country’s ruling right-wing political machine, creating an unexpected opening for democratic reform.  Then, in another upset halfway around the globe, Brazilian voters reelected incumbent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva over his far-right challenger, Flávio Bolsonaro. “Democracy always, dictatorship never again,” Lula said in his victory speech. That’s two big repudiations of the nationalist right in 24 hours. Not quite enough to declare a trend, maybe, but sufficient to remind us that there’s still hope for the world’s embattled democratic institutions.  More than that, these results offer evidence of something that sounds naive and Pollyannish in our current moment, but can (apparently!) still prove true: Organizing can be a powerful force for electoral change — both abroad and maybe here at home. Go a little deeper View Link To be fair, the two elections differed considerably, and I don’t want to suggest it’s all sunshine and democratic renewal ahead for Brazil and Serbia. Bolsonaro is refusing to concede, for instance. And in Serbia, the victorious Student List still has to stand up a government, a prime minister, and a full policy platform — something the nascent movement has never done before.  But academics and elections-watchers in both countries have credited the results in large part to mass protests and grassroots organizing that helped mobilize unexpected numbers of voters. Serbian students began their movement in 2024, following the partial collapse of a railway station that killed 16 people. The government’s failure to fully explain the cause of the collapse — or hold anyone responsible — fueled months of marches, protest bike rides, and other demonstrations. That movement eventually grew into the Student List: an opposition electoral slate that fielded 250 candidates in Sunday’s parliamentary elections.  The story in Brazil is quite different. Lula, the country’s leftist president, was actually poised to lose. Brazil uses a two-round popular vote to elect its president, and if no candidate secures more than half the vote in the first round, then the top two candidates proceed to a runoff election. Lula placed second in that first vote, after Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and the heir to his father’s far-right political movement.  To many Brazilians, that second-place finish served as a kind of wake-up call. “No runoff campaign in Brazil has ever brought so many people to the streets and onto social media,” Guilherme Casarões, an associate professor of Brazilian studies at Florida International University, wrote in an analysis of the surprise results. One WhatsApp channel dedicated to turning voters out for Lula grew to nearly 11 million followers, up from just 50,000 after his first-round loss.  Looking at these projects abroad, I’m struck that American pro-democracy movements like No Kings haven’t achieved that kind of influence. Arguably, that’s in part a consequence of their failure to turn protest energy into actual political organizing — things like registering voters, knocking on doors, and fielding candidates.  But there are some signs that may be shifting. No Kings has lately pivoted its focus, for instance, from mostly organizing protests to urging Americans — of both parties — to vote in the midterms. And Indivisible, one of the groups behind the movement, claims that early voting surged during the latest protests in the zip codes where they occurred. It’s not exactly a central Balkan moment, but maybe it’s a hint of things to come. Elections can surprise you, after all. Just ask a Serb or a Brazilian.  One link for later ➨ Leave your big life decisions to chance. (Sort of.) A team of researchers invited people to make a big life decision by flipping a coin and then tracked their happiness with the outcome. They found that, of the people who obeyed the results of the toss, the ones who changed something big were overwhelmingly happier. That doesn’t literally mean we should all resort to coin tosses, but it should tell us something important: We often tend to be too cautious about making major changes.  Before you go… Did you know…that in the 1870s and ’80s, spectators flocked to Madison Square Garden for long-distance walking competitions? Athletes walked up to 600 miles in six days, just going round and round the stadium.  Today’s trivia: Which New Jersey city was the first predominantly white community in the US to vote in favor of school integration? (You can find this and other brain puzzles in Vox’s daily crossword. Look for the answer in tomorrow’s edition.) Yesterday’s trivia: Last week we asked you for the radioactive noble gas with the chemical symbol Rn. That would be radon, once a trendy (deadly) ingredient in quack medicines.

Central News Today

Central News Today breaks down complex issues with unique perspective, bringing high-quality journalism to millions of readers around the world.

NEWSLETTER