By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A Sudanese human rights group has reported the army is torturing people to death in Khartoum, where the army recently regained control. The Emergency Lawyers group documented hundreds of arrests, with some detainees later found dead with evidence of torture. The group observed a dangerous escalation in violations, with detainees facing inhumane conditions, unfair trials, or release in poor health. Both the army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have been accused of atrocities during the ongoing civil war, contributing to a severe humanitarian crisis and a cholera outbreak.
Read the original article here
Sudan’s army torturing people to death, according to rights groups, paints a horrific picture. The situation is dire, and it seems to be a recurring theme in this long-standing conflict. The recapturing of the city by the Sudanese army from the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) is just the latest chapter in a brutal civil war. The war itself, with its shocking death toll in the tens of thousands, underscores the urgent need for attention and action.
It’s concerning that this conflict receives so little international coverage, especially given the atrocities being committed. The term “genocide” has been used, which is a heavy accusation and demands thorough investigation and consideration. The politics at play, seemingly designed to keep the world from seeing the full scope of the tragedy, are frankly appalling. Both Sudan and Yemen deserve more attention and support from the international community. One has to wonder if the lack of coverage is due to journalistic principles or something else entirely.
The reports of torture and death at the hands of the Sudanese army, including the details of sexual violence, are deeply disturbing. The descriptions of these acts are horrifying, and the lack of response from the army when asked for comment further raises alarm. It’s a grim reminder of the darker aspects of human nature and the lengths some people will go to inflict suffering.
The involvement of various groups, like the RSF and the Janjaweed Coalition, only complicates the situation, making it even more difficult to find a resolution. The Sudanese army’s actions, including the alleged use of chemical weapons and the targeting of protesters, further erode any trust. It is worth thinking if those who are considered the ‘good guys’ are just as bad if not worse, as the RSF in this conflict.
The situation also highlights a lack of a “morally better” side, only sides fighting for their own cause. The involvement of foreign entities, even through humanitarian aid, raises questions about the motivations and potential biases. There may be the temptation to use the tragedy to advance other agendas.
The lack of significant public outcry and media coverage suggests a disturbing double standard. It’s disheartening to see how the victims’ identities are often overlooked, especially if they don’t fit into a certain narrative. It’s a sobering thought, and a reminder that the world’s attention is often selective and influenced by various factors. The world needs to see that all lives matter regardless of pigmentation, race, or creed.
The proxy war aspect, with outside involvement in the conflict, adds another layer of complexity. The role of various actors, including the Wagner group, and the supply of aid, also raise concerns. It’s a reminder that this conflict is not happening in a vacuum and there is a level of strategic planning behind it.
The calls for action and greater international support are completely valid. It is not about which side one prefers but the need for all sides to be held accountable for their actions. A more comprehensive and consistent approach to addressing human rights abuses across the globe is vital.