By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The World Health Organization (WHO) has condemned the killing of over 460 patients and companions at the Saudi Maternity Hospital in el-Fasher, Sudan, by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The RSF’s actions included abducting health workers and seizing the city after an 18-month siege, leading to reports of ethnic killings. The European Union has also condemned the RSF, citing the targeting of civilians based on ethnicity and calling for the protection of civilians and humanitarian access. The violence has resulted in mass displacement, starvation, and a humanitarian crisis.
Read the original article here
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: This headline, reporting on a massacre at a maternity ward perpetrated by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan, is absolutely horrific, to say the least. It’s the kind of news that stops you in your tracks, demanding you to understand how something so heinous could possibly happen. The World Health Organization (WHO) is rightly “appalled.” It’s difficult to find words that adequately express the level of disgust and outrage this act inspires. How can anyone justify deliberately targeting a maternity ward, a place dedicated to the most vulnerable – mothers and newborns?
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: It’s natural to feel a deep sense of despair and anger when confronted with such barbarity. The thought process immediately goes to, “What kind of human being could commit such an act?” And, further, it prompts reflections on what this means for humanity. The lack of widespread coverage of this specific event, despite the multitude of news organizations we have access to, is also troubling. The apparent silence, or muted response, feels like a betrayal of the victims and a failure to hold the perpetrators accountable.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: The question then becomes, what are the international bodies doing? Beyond expressing outrage, what tangible actions are being taken to help these people? It’s hard not to feel cynical about the role of international politics, especially when considering the alleged support of the RSF by countries like the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which has not, to my knowledge, been subject to international sanctions. The reality is often far more complex and troubling, with economic interests and strategic alliances frequently overshadowing humanitarian concerns. The idea of anyone profiting from the conflict, like by buying “blood gold”, adds another layer of disgust.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: This is not just about a military conflict; it’s a cold-blooded murder. The RSF, with their roots in the Janjaweed militia, which has a long and bloody history of atrocities, is at the forefront of the violence. The Janjaweed’s history of genocide in Darfur, where they targeted Black Africans for total eradication, offers a chilling context. Now, in the midst of Sudan’s civil war, they seem to have free rein to commit further atrocities, with no real checks on their power. Their actions are truly reprehensible, making it easy to argue that they could be considered among the most evil groups on Earth.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: The strategies employed in this conflict, like targeting hospitals and medical facilities, are a clear indication of a desire to inflict maximum suffering. It is a war waged with the goal to harm as many innocents as possible. What’s also clear is that both sides in this conflict are responsible for significant violence, blurring the lines of who is the “victim” and who is the “perpetrator.” This adds complexity to any efforts to stop the war because of the cyclical nature of revenge and reprisal.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: The role of external actors is also a cause for concern. The fact that various global and regional powers are supplying weapons to both sides fuels the conflict, making a peaceful resolution even more difficult. The cynicism of the situation is staggering. It’s hard not to feel that the international community is more concerned with its own interests than with the lives of the Sudanese people.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: We also have to consider the fact that the international response often seems inadequate, and there seems to be a tendency to focus on the symptoms rather than the root causes of the violence. The idea of turning “peacekeeping” to “peace enforcing” raises a fundamental question about how the international community intervenes in such conflicts. The historical record shows that these interventions are incredibly difficult. In the case of UN peacekeepers, there’s always the inherent danger of them becoming targets themselves.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: The article highlights that the flow of weapons from various countries, including China, Russia, Serbia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen, is fueling the conflict. This is a crucial point. It’s easy to be outraged by the atrocities on the ground, but the reality is that external actors are also complicit by providing the means for the violence to continue. Stopping the flow of arms is a critical step in de-escalating the conflict.
Sudan: WHO ‘appalled’ by RSF maternity ward massacre – DW – 10/29/2025: In thinking about the situation, there’s a strong desire to believe that the world would intervene and stop this horrible violence. But the harsh reality is that international interventions are often complex, fraught with unintended consequences, and can often make things worse. The people of Sudan are really on their own and that is tragic.