Sudan is enduring the world’s largest humanitarian and displacement crisis, with famine conditions already confirmed in parts of North Darfur and South Kordofan and a further 20 localities at risk of crossing the famine threshold by late 2026. According to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), over 21 million people—roughly two out of every five Sudanese—are experiencing crisis levels of food insecurity or worse, while around 300,000 are already living in catastrophic conditions marked by extreme food shortages, acute malnutrition, and heightened risk of death. Nearly 4.2 million cases of acute malnutrition are projected for 2026, including more than 800,000 cases of severe acute malnutrition among children under five, representing a sharp increase from 2025 levels. The United Nations has warned that
“Sudan is facing the world’s worst famine. Catastrophic food insecurity has spread to four areas and threatens 20 more.”
The war’s human cost
The conflict, which erupted on 15 April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has displaced an estimated 14 million people, including over 6.8 million internally displaced and close to 4.5 million refugees or asylum‑seekers in neighbouring countries. Health systems have virtually collapsed, with nearly 34 million people requiring humanitarian aid and 21 million needing health assistance; disease outbreaks such as cholera, malaria, measles, dengue, and polio are widespread due to the breakdown of essential services. The UN has verified more than 5,700 grave violations against children since the war began, with nearly 80% of child casualties in early 2026 linked to drone attacks. As one humanitarian official put it,
“Sudan is defined by all the wrong superlatives: the largest displaced population, the most severe food insecurity crisis, and the single worst humanitarian disaster on earth.”
Security Council engagement and diplomatic stalemate
The UN Security Council has held multiple briefings and issued press statements in 2026, expressing deep concern over continued violence, condemning drone attacks on civilians and humanitarian assets, and warning that deliberate attacks on aid workers may constitute war crimes. In February 2026, the Council demanded protection of civilians, safe humanitarian access, and accountability for atrocities, including systematic killings and ethnically motivated targeting in El Fasher. In June, members called for restraint, a humanitarian truce, and an end to external interference, with a press statement warning of imminent mass atrocities in El Obeid and demanding the RSF halt any assault on the city. Yet despite these statements, the Council has not adopted new binding measures specific to Sudan, relying instead on press statements and calls for ceasefire and access rather than enforceable resolutions. A joint statement by the United States, European countries, the African Union, the EU, IGAD, the League of Arab States, and the UN reaffirmed their commitment to Sudan’s people and to a peaceful, democratic future, declaring,
“We express deep concern over the devastating humanitarian consequences of the ongoing conflict, where millions face displacement, acute food insecurity, and limited access to basic services, while attacks on civilians and infrastructure persist.”
The statement added,
“The protection of civilians must remain central. We reaffirm the urgent need for a humanitarian truce, leading to a permanent ceasefire.”
The geopolitics of external interference
Sudan’s famine is not merely a product of natural disaster or internal strife; it is being exacerbated by the strategic interests and military support of external actors. The RSF, led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), has received backing from regional powers, while the SAF has sought support from other states, turning Sudan into a proxy battleground. Gulf states are supplying drones and advanced weapons to opposite sides; Saudi Arabia backs the SAF, while the United Arab Emirates (UAE) backs the RSF. Neighboring states—including Egypt, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Libya, and others—provide fighters, weapons, and diplomatic cover to support their party of interest. The SAF is supported by Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar, while the RSF receives backing from Libya, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Russia’s paramilitary Africa Corps (formerly known as the Wagner Group). On the other hand, the UAE is the primary supporter of the RSF, using Chad’s Amdjarass airport as a hub to funnel weapons and supplies to Hemedti’s forces. In a March 6 speech marking the publication of a report by the UN Panel of Experts, U.S. ambassador Linda Thomas‑Greenfield graphically described how
“the death, destruction, [and] depravity that has defined this conflict…is being fueled by arms transfers from a handful of regional powers. Armed transfers that must stop.”
Denmark and like‑minded Council members condemned direct and indirect external interference, demanding the RSF halt offensives and calling for immediate, safe, unimpeded humanitarian access. China’s Ambassador Fu Cong emphasized consensus on achieving a ceasefire and alleviating the humanitarian crisis, stating,
“China strongly condemns attacks against civilians, civilian facilities, and United Nations personnel”
and warning that
“Humanitarian issues must not be used as a tool for political pressure.”
Egypt’s UN envoy stressed that Sudan’s territorial integrity is a “red line,” calling for an immediate humanitarian truce, safe corridors for civilians and aid, and unconditional international coordination to resolve the crisis.
The humanitarian funding gap
Despite the scale of the crisis, the UN’s 2026 humanitarian response appeal for Sudan—approximately $2.8 billion—is only about 17% funded, reflecting severe under‑resourcing amid competing global crises. The World Food Programme reports that almost 19.5 million people face crisis levels of hunger, with some already in catastrophic conditions and multiple areas at risk of famine. WHO has appealed for $145 million to reach 7.6 million people inside Sudan and over 500,000 refugees in neighbouring countries, yet funding remains critically short. As one UN official warned,
“Sudan is facing the world’s worst famine. Catastrophic food insecurity has spread to four areas and threatens 20 more.”
Without a cessation of hostilities and a surge in funding, Sudan risks becoming “the world’s largest hunger crisis in recent history.”
The path forward: an analysis
This analysis underscores that Sudan’s famine is a man‑made catastrophe driven by geopolitical maneuvering and external interference. The international community faces a stark choice: allow Sudan’s famine to deepen amid strategic competition, or prioritize civilian protection and unconditional humanitarian access. A humanitarian truce leading to a permanent ceasefire is essential, as is the extension of the Darfur arms embargo to all of Sudan and accountability for atrocities through the ICC. As the Security Council prepares to discuss Sudan’s worsening crisis, the voices of civilians—especially women and children—must guide its actions. The world cannot afford to forget Sudan’s forgotten famine.
