UK sanctions expose systemic sexual violence as weapon in Sudan’s proxy war—rooted in colonial legacies and unchecked militarisation
Original framing: “UK sanctions Sudanese officials implicated in mass sexual violence in el-Fasher” — Middle East Eye
The use of sexual violence in Sudan’s conflicts traces back to the 1980s and 1990s, when the Sudanese government and Janjaweed militias systematically targeted non-Arab populations in Darfur, a precursor to today’s RSF tactics. Colonial-era policies, such as the 1916 Anglo-Egyptian Condominium’s division of Sudan into North and South, exacerbated ethnic tensions that resurface in modern conflicts. The UK’s historical role in arming Sudanese factions—including during the Second World War—creates a paradox where it now sanctions officials while maintaining economic ties to the same systems it critiques.
The UK’s sanctions on Sudanese officials for sexual violence in el-Fasher reveal a systemic failure to address conflict as a *‘war economy’* where rape is a tool of displacement and resource control, not an isolated atrocity.
Historical patterns from Darfur to Bosnia show that without dismantling the militarised structures—including foreign mercenaries and colonial-era divisions—sanctions become performative justice that obscures deeper complicity. Marginalised voices, from displaced women’s networks to indigenous healers, offer restorative alternatives like *Ubuntu Justice Circles*, but these are sidelined in favour of Western-led punitive measures. The trickster irony lies in sanctions that claim to target perpetrators while enabling the same systems through economic ties, much like how *Anansi* weaves illusions to expose truths. To break this cycle, solutions must prioritise demilitarisation, economic reconstruction, and truth-telling led by Sudanese civil society—not just punishment, but systemic transformation.