dw.com
Sudanese Army Recaptured Khartoum Center; Risk of Country Division Remains
After days of fighting, Sudan's army reportedly seized the presidential palace and central Khartoum on March 21, 2025, but the RSF claims to be near and still fighting; the conflict, which began in April 2023, risks dividing the country, worsening an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis affecting nearly 13 million Sudanese.
- What is the immediate impact of the Sudanese army's reported recapture of central Khartoum?
- The Sudanese army reportedly regained control of the presidential palace and central Khartoum after days of fighting, according to the Sudan Tribune and military sources on March 21, 2025. Videos circulating online showed soldiers inside the palace and captured Rapid Support Forces (RSF) fighters. However, the RSF claims to remain active near the palace.
- How has the conflict between the Sudanese army and the RSF led to the current humanitarian crisis and the threat of national division?
- The conflict between the Sudanese army and the RSF, ongoing since April 2023, stems from a power struggle between General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo over the RSF's integration into the army. This conflict has created the world's largest humanitarian crisis, marked by famine, displacement, and disease. The RSF's recent move to form a separate government in areas they control raises concerns of a permanent division of Sudan.
- What are the long-term implications of a potential division of Sudan, and what role do external actors play in influencing the conflict's outcome?
- The potential division of Sudan, with the RSF establishing a parallel government in West Darfur and parts of the south, significantly worsens the humanitarian crisis. This division would likely solidify military control over Sudan's political future, hindering peace prospects and exacerbating human rights violations. International involvement, particularly regarding arms supplies to both sides, is a major factor in the conflict's outcome.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article's headline and opening paragraphs emphasize the army's apparent takeover of the presidential palace and city center. This immediately sets a tone suggesting a potential turning point in the conflict, favoring the army's perspective. While the RSF's claims are mentioned, the initial focus frames the army's actions as more significant. The sequencing of information could be improved to present a more balanced account.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, avoiding overtly charged terms. However, phrases like "erbitterter Machtkampf" (bitter power struggle) and descriptions of the humanitarian crisis as "katastrophal" (catastrophic) carry a strong emotional weight, potentially influencing reader perception. More neutral language could be used, such as "intense power struggle" and "severe humanitarian crisis".
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the conflict between the Sudanese army and the RSF, but it could benefit from including more perspectives from civilians and humanitarian organizations beyond the quoted individual in the refugee camp. The long-term effects of the conflict on Sudan's economy and social structures are also largely absent. While the humanitarian crisis is mentioned, a deeper exploration of its various facets would be beneficial.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified view of the conflict as a struggle between two military factions, the Sudanese army and the RSF. The complex political, ethnic, and economic factors driving the conflict are not fully explored. The framing of the potential split into two regions is presented as a binary choice, ignoring the possibility of other outcomes.
Gender Bias
The article doesn't appear to exhibit significant gender bias in its language or sourcing. While specific individuals are quoted, there's no noticeable disparity in the treatment of genders.
Sustainable Development Goals
The ongoing conflict in Sudan has created the world's largest humanitarian crisis, leading to widespread displacement, hunger, and lack of access to basic necessities. This directly impacts the ability of millions to escape poverty.