The ongoing conflict in Sudan, particularly the actions of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has raised significant concerns about the erosion of international humanitarian law (IHL). In its operations in Darfur, the RSF has begun using tactics remarkably similar to those employed by Israel in Gaza—manipulating human rights language to justify atrocities. This dangerous strategy has the potential to set a precedent for genocide and widespread ethnic cleansing.
RSF’s Attack on Zamzam Camp
On April 11, 2024, the RSF launched a brutal assault on the Zamzam displacement camp in North Darfur, Sudan. The camp, home to thousands of displaced civilians, primarily from non-Arab ethnic groups like the Zaghawa and Fur, was attacked under the claim that it was a “military zone.” RSF forces set fire to homes, executed medics, and shot at civilians attempting to flee. At least 500 people were killed, and hundreds of thousands were forced to flee their homes.
The RSF defended the assault by asserting that the camp was a stronghold for armed groups, a claim that remains unsubstantiated. This rhetoric mirrors Israel’s justification for targeting civilian areas in Gaza, such as hospitals and schools, by labeling them as Hamas “military targets” or “human shields.” Both tactics attempt to strip civilians of their legal protections under international law, making them vulnerable to attacks.
A Template for Genocide: Parallels with Israel’s Tactics
The tactics used by the RSF closely resemble Israel’s approach in Gaza, raising concerns about the spread of these strategies to other conflict zones. Since the escalation of violence in Gaza in October 2023, Israel has repeatedly claimed that civilian infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, serves as Hamas command centers. By labeling these locations as military targets, Israel has been able to justify widespread attacks on civilian areas.
Similarly, the RSF has employed similar claims in Sudan. By framing the Zamzam camp as a military zone, the RSF attempted to legitimize the mass killing of civilians. Legal experts, including Luigi Daniele from Nottingham Law School, have warned that such actions follow a genocidal template—one that seeks to eliminate or displace entire populations under the guise of military necessity.
Mass Expulsions and the “Humanitarian” Narrative
Another disturbing similarity between the RSF and Israel is the use of forced displacement under the pretense of humanitarian aid. In Gaza, Israel has pushed over 2.3 million Palestinians into smaller, more confined areas, claiming these are “safe zones” while simultaneously bombing them. The RSF has adopted a similar strategy in Darfur, urging civilians to flee violence through “humanitarian corridors.” However, these expulsions are often accompanied by violence, including the detention and possible execution of those attempting to flee.
On April 11, 2024, an RSF-affiliated political group called for civilians to evacuate the Zamzam camp via a “humanitarian corridor” to nearby towns. Yet, just weeks later, RSF commanders were seen detaining civilians who had fled, accusing them of collaborating with rival factions. This tactic of forced displacement, masked as humanitarian assistance, is a clear example of ethnic cleansing.
Manipulating Human Rights Language
The RSF, much like Israel, has strategically adopted human rights language to deflect attention from its war crimes. In March 2024, an RSF-backed political group expressed solidarity with Sudanese women suffering in the war, focusing on “tragic conditions” they face. However, this statement ignored the extensive documentation of sexual violence committed by the RSF, which has been recorded by organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
This manipulation of human rights rhetoric allows the RSF to present itself as a protector of Sudanese citizens, despite mounting evidence of its involvement in widespread atrocities. Similarly, Israel has used human rights language to defend its military actions, despite the documented civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure in Gaza.
International Response and Accountability
Despite growing evidence of war crimes, both the RSF and Israel have faced limited international consequences. The United Nations and other global bodies have condemned both the RSF and the Sudanese military for violations of IHL, yet there has been no significant international response to hold these perpetrators accountable. As a result, the RSF has continued its violent campaign, aided by political factions within Sudan that justify their actions.
The RSF’s adoption of Israel’s tactics is a dangerous precedent, not only for Sudan but for international humanitarian law. The use of mass expulsions, the manipulation of human rights language, and the framing of genocide as military necessity threaten to normalize such practices in conflict zones worldwide.
The RSF’s adoption of Israel’s genocidal tactics in Sudan represents a chilling shift in the conduct of modern warfare. By using human rights language to justify mass killings and displacements, the RSF is following a dangerous pattern that undermines international humanitarian law. The international community must act decisively to recognize these tactics for what they are—deliberate strategies to commit mass atrocities—and take immediate steps to prevent further violence and suffering. The world cannot afford to let these tactics become the new norm in conflict zones around the globe.
