taz.de
Sudan War: Army Nears Victory in Khartoum Amidst Worsening Humanitarian Crisis
Nearly two years after the start of the Sudanese war, the Sudanese army is on the verge of retaking Khartoum from the RSF militia, but the humanitarian crisis, including the world's worst famine, continues to worsen despite the potential military victory.
- What is the immediate impact of the Sudanese army's potential victory in Khartoum?
- After nearly two years of war, the Sudanese army is close to recapturing Khartoum from the RSF militia. This potential victory would mark a significant turning point in the conflict, which has caused the world's largest refugee crisis and worst famine.
- How has the control of fertile agricultural lands influenced the conflict's trajectory?
- The conflict's impact extends beyond Khartoum; control of fertile lands along the Blue Nile River is crucial for food security. The RSF's previous capture of Wad Madani and Sinja threatened this, but the army's recapture of these cities has shifted the balance of power.
- What are the long-term consequences of the conflict's impact on Sudan's infrastructure and humanitarian situation?
- Despite potential military gains, the conflict's humanitarian crisis continues to worsen. The ongoing violence, including attacks on civilians and infrastructure, exacerbates the famine and displacement, indicating a challenging path to lasting peace and stability.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the military victories of the SAF, presenting the narrative largely from their perspective. The headline (if any) would likely reflect this emphasis. Phrases such as "the government would have won the war" and Burhan's statements about the RSF being "condemned to disappear" reinforce this bias. The use of terms like 'terrorist militias' to describe the RSF is a clear example of framing. The severe humanitarian crisis is presented as a consequence of the conflict rather than a central driving force, potentially downplaying its importance in understanding the situation.
Language Bias
The use of terms like "terrorist militias" to describe the RSF is loaded language, lacking neutrality. The description of the RSF's actions as a "Putschversuch" (putsch attempt) might also carry a negative connotation. Suggesting alternatives such as "armed opposition group" for RSF instead of loaded terms would improve neutrality. The repeated use of phrases like 'government victory' and the celebration of military successes also skews the overall tone towards a pro-government stance.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the military conflict and its impact on civilians, but lacks detailed analysis of the root causes of the conflict, the political context, and the international involvement. While mentioning the involvement of local militias supporting the army, there's no deeper explanation of their roles and motivations. The economic war waged by the government is mentioned but not explored in detail. The perspectives of the RSF are largely presented through their actions rather than direct quotes or statements, limiting a full understanding of their motivations and justifications.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified narrative of a clear conflict between the SAF and RSF, potentially overlooking the complex interplay of various actors, political factions, and underlying societal issues. The framing suggests a clear victory for the SAF is imminent, neglecting the possibility of protracted conflict or shifting alliances.
Gender Bias
The article doesn't explicitly focus on gender, but the absence of gendered analysis in a conflict with such profound humanitarian consequences is noteworthy. There is no mention of the disproportionate impact on women and girls, such as increased risk of sexual violence or limitations on access to essential services. This omission indicates a potential bias.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article explicitly mentions a severe famine in Sudan, affecting millions. The conflict has disrupted food production and distribution, leading to widespread hunger and the declaration of famine in multiple locations. The fight for control of fertile land along the Blue Nile further exacerbates the food crisis.