Counting the Dead: Explosive weapons’ devastating impact on civilians in Sudan

Country: Sudan Source: Action on Armed Violence By Niamh Gillen Sudan has become one of the world’s deadliest conflicts for civilians. Across towns and cities, high numbers of civilians have been killed or injured by explosive weapons. This article analyses data from Action on Armed Violence on casualties caused by explosive violence in Sudan, focusing on the sharp escalation in the use of explosive weapons in populated areas since the conflict began, producing high civilian casualty rates per incident of use. Introduction On 1 February 2025, in the crowded Sabreen market of Omdurman, Sudan’s second-largest city, shoppers buying fruit and grain were caught in a sudden shelling attack. At least 60 people were killed and more than 250 wounded, according to Doctors Without Borders. 1 The strike came only two months after air raids and barrel bombs hit the same city, killing another 60 and injuring at least 230. Together, they rank among the deadliest incidents of the use of explosive weapons recorded in Sudan since the most recent conflict began in April 2023. These were not isolated incidents but part of an escalating bombardment campaign that began when Sudan’s military, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and a paramilitary group known as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), escalated conflict in the country into civil war. This fighting was led by rival military leaders, who had jointly overthrown the transitional government at the end of 2021. 2 What began as a power struggle in the capital, Khartoum, spread into a nationwide conflict. Both parties to the conflict have used explosive weapons to strike markets, hospitals, and encampments, devastating infrastructure and killing thousands. 3 There has been growing international concern over the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, with increased calls from agencies such as the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), who have repeatedly “called for civilians to be protected and for this ferocious violence to stop. ” 4 Sudan has become one of the world’s deadliest conflicts for civilians. Across towns and cities, high numbers of civilians have been killed or injured by explosive weapons. This article analyses data from Action on Armed Violence’s (AOAV) monitoring of casualties caused by explosive weapons to identify patterns of civilian harm in Sudan. This includes a specific focus on the sharp escalation in the use of explosive weapons in populated areas throughout Sudan since the conflict began that has reportedly produced high civilian casualty rates per incident of use. Civilian casualties and the use of explosive weapons in Sudan AOAV has monitored civilian casualties from the use of explosive weapons in Sudan since 2010, documenting how such violence has long affected the population, but with a dramatic intensification since the renewal of conflict in 2023. AOAV collects data on incidents of explosive violence from English-language media reports in which civilians and armed actors were reportedly killed or injured. In the case of Sudan, the majority of incidents are taken from several English-language Sudanese sources. Overall limited reporting on Sudan in media sources means that many incidents are not captured by AOAV, and the true scale of civilian harm is difficult to ascertain. Before conflict broke out in 2023, there were sporadic reports of civilian harm resulting from explosive weapons use. AOAV recorded at least 797 reports of civilian casualties between 2010 and 2022 from mortars, shelling and IEDs. As conflict escalated in 2023, AOAV recorded 2, 627 casualties, with a further 4, 478 in 2024 and another 5, 440 in 2025. Almost all casualties recorded by AOAV occurred in populated areas such as markets, residential districts or encampments, marking a notable shift towards the use of drone and airstrikes and artillery shelling in Sudan’s towns and cities. Since April 2023, the rate of civilians killed per attack more than tripled compared to previous years to 22 civilians per attack. During this time, ground-launched weapons caused 58 percent of civilian casualties, mainly from artillery and non-specific shelling, 5 while air-launched weapons accounted for 39 percent. Artillery shelling alone killed or injured 3, 739 civilians, and airstrikes killed and injured 4, 153. Foreign-manufactured explosive weapons and munitions in Sudan Amnesty International documented the presence of recently manufactured foreign weapons throughout Sudan, including explosive weapons platforms and their munitions, such as mortars. 6 Specific weaponry listed as used by the RSF include the Chinese-manufactured Wing Loong II and FeiHong-95 drones. 7 Weaponry listed as in use by the SAF include the Mohajer-6, Zajil-3, Bayraktar TB2 and DJI MAVIC 3 drones. 8 Foreign-manufactured explosive weapons and munitions in Sudan Amnesty International documented the presence of recently manufactured foreign weapons throughout Sudan, including explosive weapons platforms and their munitions, such as mortars. 6 Specific weaponry listed as used by the RSF include the Chinese-manufactured Wing Loong II and FeiHong-95 drones. 7 Weaponry listed as in use by the SAF include the Mohajer-6, Zajil-3, Bayraktar TB2 and DJI MAVIC 3 drones. Both the RSF and SAF have used a combination of ground- and air-launched weapons in the current conflict, as illustrated in Figure 1. The RSF’s frequent use of ground-launched weapons, such as artillery shelling, reflects the group’s lack of air-power capacity and access to air-launched weapons. Figure 1 – Types of explosive weapons that reportedly caused civilian casualties used by the RSF and SAD In contrast, the SAF has made greater use of air and drone strikes. This difference in weapon deployment highlights the distinct capacities and tactics of the two actors, with the RSF relying on heavy shelling and the SAF deploying air-delivered munitions and drones to conduct strikes, particularly in populated urban areas. Figure 2 – Map illustrating the geographical scale of civilian casualties The overwhelming majority of civilian death and injury in Sudan is attributable the use of explosive weapons within populated towns and cities. This pattern shows how urban locations, such as markets, villages, shops and places of worship, have become epicentres of harm. The regions most affected since April 2023 are North Darfur, Khartoum, South Darfur, North Kordofan, and Jazira. Populated areas in North Darfur alone suffered 223 recorded attacks and over 5, 400 civilian casualties. Khartoum, the conflict’s epicentre, experienced nearly 3, 800 attacks (see Figure 2). Cities such as El Fasher in North Darfur, Omdurman in Khartoum, and Nyala in South Darfur were some of the most impacted by explosive weapon use. Specifically, in terms of civilian deaths recorded by AOAV, 38 percent occurred in residential districts, 19 percent in markets, and 11 percent in camps for displaced families. Hospitals, villages, police stations, and places of worship account for the remaining 32 percent. Why are casualty rates so high? Sudan has become one of the world’s deadliest conflicts for civilians. Since many of the frontlines are found in cities, civilians are at high risk of being affected by attacks with explosive weapons used by parties to the conflict. The urban nature of the conflict means that any one attack is likely to affect a significant number of civilians, and AOAV data shows high numbers of civilian casualties occurring in individual incidents of explosive weapons use. The SAF and RSF have repeatedly struck densely populated areas using unguided artillery and bombs. In February 2025, Human Rights Watch reported that the SAF dropped unguided munitions on residential and commercial districts in Nyala, South Darfur, in attacks that were inherently indiscriminate. 9 For example, an air strike carried out by the SAF on 3 February 2025 struck Nyala’s Cinema district, killing 25 people, and injuring a further 63. 10 Ninety percent of victims of SAF attacks and 84 percent of those attributed to the RSF died in urban residential districts, markets, or other dense urban areas. The number of civilians harmed per attack has risen from around 19 in 2023 to 26 in 2025, a 37 percent increase in two years. This increase is likely due to the concentration of attacks and use of explosive weapons with wide-area effects on populated areas where civilians are likely to be present, and thus, higher numbers harmed per incident. This escalation reflects increased use of explosive weapons as conflict intensifies, as well as widespread use of explosive weapons with wide-area effects. The New York Times has estimated the death toll since the civil war erupted in April 2023 to be up to 150, 000, with 11 million others being forced from their homes. 11 This death toll includes all direct and reverberating effects of the conflict, from death and injury from small-arms, to disease, famine and displacement caused in large part by the reverberating impacts of explosive weapons. The UN and Reporters sans Frontières have stated difficulties in reporting true casualty figures across the country due to communication blackouts and restricted access. 12 Implications for the Political Declaration UN Secretary-General António Guterres has warned that Sudan’s war could destabilise the wider region and urged all parties to protect civilians. 13 Central to that effort is the Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences Arising from the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas, a framework endorsed by 89 of states to limit the use of explosive weapons in towns and cities. Sudan has not yet endorsed the Declaration, though many endorsing states maintain some degree of responsibility for mitigating civilian harm in the conflict, including through decisions regarding arms transfers that supply explosive weapons to the RSF and SAF. 14 The use and impact of explosive weapons have deepened every dimension of Sudan’s humanitarian disaster. Hospitals lie in ruins, water systems are broken, and cholera and other preventable diseases spread through overcrowded camps. Millions now face famine. Sudan’s tragedy exposes the disconnect between growing international norms on strengthening the protection of civilians from the use of explosive weapons and the continued practice of widespread use with severe humanitarian consequences, as both the SAF and RSF continue to use explosive weapons with wide area effects to the detriment of civilians in its towns and cities. Closing this gap requires more than signatures. Universalisation of the Declaration must be matched by effective implementation: ensure armed forces implement a range of policies to help avoid civilian harm, as well as ensuring military practice takes the direct and indirect effects on civilians into account when planning operations and attacks in populated areas. 15 The Declaration commits signatories to restrict and refrain from using explosive weapons in populated areas when civilian harm is foreseeable. 16 It represents an appeal to restraint and accountability. Yet in Sudan, the use of airstrikes, artillery, and missile attacks on urban areas have become routine, leaving civilians exposed to relentless destruction.

Read full story on Reliefweb