EU sanctions RSF deputy leader as Gulf urges US to step in

EU sanctions RSF deputy Abdelrahim Dagalo as Gulf states urge U.S. intervention, highlighting rising geopolitical stakes and worsening Sudan humanitarian crisis (image source)

The European Union has imposed targeted sanctions on Abdelrahim Hamdan Dagalo, identified as the deputy commander of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), announcing a visa ban and asset freeze as part of a broader effort to hold those responsible for escalating violence in Sudan to account. The move follows a series of dramatic battlefield shifts, including the RSF’s capture of El Fasher, and mounting reports from humanitarian organisations of mass killings, sexual violence and deliberate obstruction of aid in Darfur. EU officials framed the measures as a calibrated response aimed at individual accountability while signalling that further restrictions could follow if the violence continues.

Sanctions officials described the action as intended to disrupt the financial and logistical networks that enable the RSF’s operations, and to send a clear message that the international community will pursue consequences for those implicated in serious violations of international humanitarian law. The EU’s announcement also included an appeal for an immediate halt to arms deliveries that could prolong the conflict, reflecting concern about external flows of weapons and materiel that sustain fighting and complicate diplomatic efforts to secure a ceasefire.

Abdelrahim Hamdan Dagalo (image source)

Humanitarian agencies say the seizure of El Fasher has produced fresh waves of displacement and acute shortages of food, water and medical care, intensifying calls for safe corridors and unfettered humanitarian access. Aid workers report that access constraints, insecurity around distribution points and the breakdown of local governance structures are making it increasingly difficult to reach civilians in need. The EU’s sanctions are intended to complement diplomatic pressure on regional and international partners to curb support for armed actors and to prioritise civilian protection.

At the same time, diplomatic activity has intensified in the Gulf and Washington. Saudi Arabia has publicly urged President Donald Trump to intervene to help end the fighting, a request that followed high-level discussions between Riyadh and Washington. Saudi officials framed their appeal in terms of regional stability, refugee flows and the need to prevent the conflict from creating a wider security vacuum. President Trump responded by pledging to work with regional partners, including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, to seek a ceasefire and to coordinate humanitarian relief efforts.

The Saudi appeal underscores the geopolitical stakes of the Sudan conflict. Gulf states have long viewed stability in the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa as central to their security and economic interests. For Riyadh and its partners, the prospect of prolonged instability in Sudan raises concerns about cross-border displacement, the spread of armed groups, and disruptions to maritime routes. Their push for U.S. engagement reflects a desire to marshal broader international influence behind mediation efforts and to leverage Washington’s diplomatic and logistical capabilities.

(image source)

Analysts caution, however, that external mediation faces significant obstacles. The conflict is characterised by fragmented command structures, competing regional backers and a proliferation of armed actors with divergent agendas. Ceasefire agreements have repeatedly broken down in the past, and enforcing any truce will require credible monitoring mechanisms and guarantees from influential external actors. There is also the risk that intensified external involvement could be perceived as partisan by local actors, complicating efforts to build an inclusive political settlement.

Humanitarian consequences remain acute. Displacement has surged, with thousands fleeing urban centres and seeking shelter in makeshift camps or host communities. Health facilities are overwhelmed, and supply chains for food and medicine are disrupted. Humanitarian organisations are calling for immediate, unimpeded access to affected areas and for the protection of civilians and aid workers under international law.

The twin developments — EU sanctions and Gulf appeals for U.S. intervention — reflect a growing international consensus that the situation in Sudan cannot be allowed to deteriorate further without consequences. Sanctions aim to impose costs on those seen as driving the violence, while diplomatic pressure seeks to open channels for negotiation and relief. Whether these measures will translate into a durable reduction in hostilities depends on the willingness of regional and international actors to coordinate effectively, to restrict arms flows, and to prioritise mechanisms that protect civilians and enable humanitarian operations.