Sudan Accuses UAE of Violating Genocide Convention at UN’s Top Court
In a dramatic escalation of diplomatic tensions, Sudan has formally accused the United Arab Emirates (UAE) of violating the Genocide Convention by allegedly funding and arming paramilitary forces involved in atrocities during Sudan’s ongoing civil conflict. The charges were presented this week at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ highest legal body, marking a rare and consequential move on the global stage.
The Sudanese delegation claimed that the UAE’s financial and logistical support for the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) — a powerful militia currently battling the Sudanese Armed Forces — has directly contributed to mass killings, ethnic cleansing, and other acts that meet the criteria of genocide under international law.
“Our evidence shows that the United Arab Emirates has provided critical weapons, funds, and operational support to forces that are systematically targeting civilians,” Sudan’s legal representatives argued before the court in The Hague. “This conduct is not just interference in a domestic conflict — it is a grave breach of the Genocide Convention.”
The allegations come as Sudan remains engulfed in a devastating civil war that has displaced millions and triggered widespread humanitarian crises, particularly in regions like Darfur and Khartoum. According to international human rights monitors, the RSF has been implicated in numerous atrocities, including attacks on ethnic communities, destruction of homes, and indiscriminate killings.
Sudan’s legal team emphasized that the UAE’s involvement, if proven, constitutes not only a violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention — to which both Sudan and the UAE are signatories — but also undermines international peace and security.
In response to the accusations, the UAE government has denied any wrongdoing and rejected Sudan’s claims as “baseless” and “politically motivated.” Emirati officials maintain that their involvement in Sudan is limited to humanitarian efforts and diplomatic engagement, and that they do not support any armed groups.
The case before the ICJ is likely to take months, if not years, to resolve. However, the proceedings are already drawing significant global attention, as they may set a precedent for how the international legal system holds states accountable for indirectly fueling atrocities through financial and military support.
International legal experts say the case could reshape the way external state actors are scrutinized in civil conflicts, particularly in the Middle East and Africa, where proxy warfare and foreign intervention have become common. If the ICJ finds the UAE in violation of the Genocide Convention, it could trigger sanctions, reputational damage, and heightened international legal obligations.
Meanwhile, humanitarian organizations continue to raise alarms about the deteriorating situation in Sudan, where clashes between the RSF and government forces have turned towns and cities into battlegrounds. The United Nations and African Union have both called for an immediate ceasefire, although peace efforts have so far failed to yield lasting results.
As the legal battle unfolds in The Hague, Sudan’s bold move to confront a regional powerhouse like the UAE on the world stage underscores the growing complexity of the conflict — and the potential consequences for countries accused of fueling violence from afar.
Further developments in the ICJ proceedings will be closely watched by diplomats, legal scholars, and international rights groups alike, as the global community grapples with the challenge of enforcing justice in the face of modern warfare and state-sponsored militancy.
Source : Swifteradio.com
