Sudan: Accuses Ethiopia of RSF Drone Attacks From Its Territory

• Sudan has formally accused Ethiopia of allowing the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to launch drone attacks from its territory against Sudanese civilian infrastructure.
• Sudan filed official complaints with the UN Security Council and the African Union’s Peace and Security Council, citing Article 2(4) of the UN Charter as an international law violation.
• The Sudanese Sovereignty Council reported 187 drones launched in 70 attacks between February and October, identifying Asosa Airport and Bahr Dar base as alleged launch sites.
• These drone strikes reportedly damaged 14 electricity distribution stations across multiple Sudanese states, causing widespread power outages.
• Analysts are divided on the strength of Sudan's legal case, with some viewing the complaints as political while others see them as a significant diplomatic step if sufficient evidence is provided.

The gravity of the accusations, particularly the alleged international law violation Sudan Ethiopia, could set a precedent for state responsibility concerning non-state actors operating from their territory.

The Sudanese government has formally accused Ethiopia of permitting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to launch drone attacks from its territory against civilian infrastructure within Sudan. This serious allegation, which includes claims of civilian casualties and disruptions to essential services, led Sudan to file official complaints with both the United Nations Security Council and the African Union’s Peace and Security Council. The Sudanese Foreign Ministry announced on Sunday that it had submitted documentation which, according to the government, demonstrates the RSF's use of Ethiopian soil to deploy missile-equipped drones targeting civilian sites and critical facilities across the nation.

The complaints follow a series of drone strikes that reportedly caused damage to 14 electricity distribution stations across various Sudanese states, including El Gedaref, Khartoum, El Gezira, Red Sea, Sennar, White Nile, South Kordofan, River Nile, and Northern states. These attacks resulted in widespread power outages in multiple cities and states over a period of one week. Separately, Sudan’s Sovereignty Council reported a total of 187 drones launched from within Ethiopian territory in 70 distinct attacks between February and October, identifying specific alleged launch locations such as Asosa Airport and the Bahr Dar base. The council has demanded that Ethiopia shut down any facilities it claims the RSF is utilizing for these assaults on Sudan.

The Sudanese Foreign Ministry has characterized the alleged use of Ethiopian territory as a hostile act and a direct violation of international law, specifically citing Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. This article prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Sudan has called upon Ethiopia to immediately cease these alleged activities and urged the international community to hold the RSF accountable for the attacks. Ethiopia has not yet issued an immediate public response to these accusations.

Beyond demanding a halt to the attacks, the Sudanese Sovereignty Council has also called for accountability and compensation for the damages incurred. The formal complaints to the UN Security Council and the African Union’s Peace and Security Council underscore Sudan's efforts to elevate these Ethiopia RSF drone support allegations to an international forum, seeking intervention and resolution through established international bodies. The gravity of the accusations, particularly the alleged international law violation Sudan Ethiopia, could set a precedent for state responsibility concerning non-state actors operating from their territory.

Political analysts hold differing views regarding the efficacy and underlying motivations of Khartoum’s formal complaints. Analyst Qureshi Awad expressed skepticism about Sudan’s ability to construct a robust legal case, suggesting that the government has not yet furnished sufficient evidence to definitively prove the drones’ launch origins. Awad posited that the Sudan UN Security Council complaint is primarily a political maneuver, designed to prepare the Sudanese populace for the consequences of damage to essential services while simultaneously diverting attention from domestic security and defense shortcomings.

Conversely, analyst Suhaib Hamid views the complaints as a significant diplomatic initiative. Hamid contended that if Sudan can present detailed reports pinpointing alleged launch sites within Ethiopia, coupled with evidence indicating Addis Ababa’s awareness of these operations, it could substantially bolster Sudan’s position. Such evidence, Hamid suggested, might compel an international investigation or elicit a direct response from the Security Council, thereby highlighting the critical importance of robust, verifiable evidence in international legal and diplomatic proceedings.

Lawyers advising states or international organizations should monitor the progression of Sudan's formal complaints to the UN and AU, as they involve significant allegations of international law violations and could establish precedents regarding state responsibility for supporting non-state actors. The analytical debate on evidentiary strength highlights the critical importance of robust, verifiable evidence in international legal and diplomatic proceedings.

Source: Original reporting via Al Jazeera