Could Trump’s intervention bring an end to the world’s greatest humanitarian crisis?
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.
Sudan’s civil war has grown into a proxy war between competing regional powers, a dynamic that could hold the key to its resolution through the intervention of the world’s sole superpower.
Hundreds of thousands have died in the civil war, and a resulting famine has put millions more at risk. The rest of the continent is also dealing with countless numbers of refugees. The prospect of peace gained newfound hope when President Donald Trump said on Nov. 19, 2025, that he would focus his peacemaking efforts on resolving the conflict.
Despite his hopeful rhetoric, halting the war in Sudan could prove to be among his most difficult tasks yet.
Sudanese soldiers parade in the streets of Omdurman, a district of Khartoum, Sudan, on Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025, to mark the 70th anniversary of Sudanese independence. (AP Photo/Marwan Ali)
What are the difficulties in getting involved?
One of the primary issues facing Trump is the moral ambiguity of the civil war itself. Most analysts view the choice of who to back as a choice between a greater and lesser evil. The Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces were the two main belligerents who carried out the Darfur genocide that spurred so much U.S. interest in the 2000s, and both carried out the 2019 massacre that sparked the #blueforsudan social media campaign.
The crimes of the RSF are better known, in part because it carried out the greatest crime of the war so far in El Fasher.
However, the SAF is replete with its own problems, viewed by some analysts as equally bad as the RSF. Despite having the prestige of being Sudan’s historical military, the civil-war SAF is more a hodgepodge of militias. Sudan specialist and human rights researcher Jehanne Henry explained that the SAF is “not much of an army,” being more a collection of militia groups aligning themselves with the SAF and fully reliant on foreign help.
INVESTIGATORS SAY EL FASHER MASSACRE DEATH TOLL COMPARABLE TO THAT OF ENTIRE GAZA WAR IN JUST THREE WEEKS
Though the RSF’s crimes have received more attention, Henry views the groups as roughly morally equivalent. The fog of war means there is not enough evidence to “scientifically conclude that one side is worse than the other.”
Karr views the RSF as worse, saying their engagement in ethnic cleansing and possible genocide puts it over the edge.
All this presents a moral conundrum.
The state of the conflict after the fall of El Fasher also presents its own difficulties. With the fall of the last SAF …
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.
Sudan’s civil war has grown into a proxy war between competing regional powers, a dynamic that could hold the key to its resolution through the intervention of the world’s sole superpower.
Hundreds of thousands have died in the civil war, and a resulting famine has put millions more at risk. The rest of the continent is also dealing with countless numbers of refugees. The prospect of peace gained newfound hope when President Donald Trump said on Nov. 19, 2025, that he would focus his peacemaking efforts on resolving the conflict.
Despite his hopeful rhetoric, halting the war in Sudan could prove to be among his most difficult tasks yet.
Sudanese soldiers parade in the streets of Omdurman, a district of Khartoum, Sudan, on Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025, to mark the 70th anniversary of Sudanese independence. (AP Photo/Marwan Ali)
What are the difficulties in getting involved?
One of the primary issues facing Trump is the moral ambiguity of the civil war itself. Most analysts view the choice of who to back as a choice between a greater and lesser evil. The Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces were the two main belligerents who carried out the Darfur genocide that spurred so much U.S. interest in the 2000s, and both carried out the 2019 massacre that sparked the #blueforsudan social media campaign.
The crimes of the RSF are better known, in part because it carried out the greatest crime of the war so far in El Fasher.
However, the SAF is replete with its own problems, viewed by some analysts as equally bad as the RSF. Despite having the prestige of being Sudan’s historical military, the civil-war SAF is more a hodgepodge of militias. Sudan specialist and human rights researcher Jehanne Henry explained that the SAF is “not much of an army,” being more a collection of militia groups aligning themselves with the SAF and fully reliant on foreign help.
INVESTIGATORS SAY EL FASHER MASSACRE DEATH TOLL COMPARABLE TO THAT OF ENTIRE GAZA WAR IN JUST THREE WEEKS
Though the RSF’s crimes have received more attention, Henry views the groups as roughly morally equivalent. The fog of war means there is not enough evidence to “scientifically conclude that one side is worse than the other.”
Karr views the RSF as worse, saying their engagement in ethnic cleansing and possible genocide puts it over the edge.
All this presents a moral conundrum.
The state of the conflict after the fall of El Fasher also presents its own difficulties. With the fall of the last SAF …
Could Trump’s intervention bring an end to the world’s greatest humanitarian crisis?
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.
Sudan’s civil war has grown into a proxy war between competing regional powers, a dynamic that could hold the key to its resolution through the intervention of the world’s sole superpower.
Hundreds of thousands have died in the civil war, and a resulting famine has put millions more at risk. The rest of the continent is also dealing with countless numbers of refugees. The prospect of peace gained newfound hope when President Donald Trump said on Nov. 19, 2025, that he would focus his peacemaking efforts on resolving the conflict.
Despite his hopeful rhetoric, halting the war in Sudan could prove to be among his most difficult tasks yet.
Sudanese soldiers parade in the streets of Omdurman, a district of Khartoum, Sudan, on Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025, to mark the 70th anniversary of Sudanese independence. (AP Photo/Marwan Ali)
What are the difficulties in getting involved?
One of the primary issues facing Trump is the moral ambiguity of the civil war itself. Most analysts view the choice of who to back as a choice between a greater and lesser evil. The Sudanese Armed Forces and Rapid Support Forces were the two main belligerents who carried out the Darfur genocide that spurred so much U.S. interest in the 2000s, and both carried out the 2019 massacre that sparked the #blueforsudan social media campaign.
The crimes of the RSF are better known, in part because it carried out the greatest crime of the war so far in El Fasher.
However, the SAF is replete with its own problems, viewed by some analysts as equally bad as the RSF. Despite having the prestige of being Sudan’s historical military, the civil-war SAF is more a hodgepodge of militias. Sudan specialist and human rights researcher Jehanne Henry explained that the SAF is “not much of an army,” being more a collection of militia groups aligning themselves with the SAF and fully reliant on foreign help.
INVESTIGATORS SAY EL FASHER MASSACRE DEATH TOLL COMPARABLE TO THAT OF ENTIRE GAZA WAR IN JUST THREE WEEKS
Though the RSF’s crimes have received more attention, Henry views the groups as roughly morally equivalent. The fog of war means there is not enough evidence to “scientifically conclude that one side is worse than the other.”
Karr views the RSF as worse, saying their engagement in ethnic cleansing and possible genocide puts it over the edge.
All this presents a moral conundrum.
The state of the conflict after the fall of El Fasher also presents its own difficulties. With the fall of the last SAF …
