US Congress Classifies Rapid Support Forces' Actions as Genocide
In a significant move, the US Congress has unanimously passed a resolution classifying the actions of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan as "genocide." This decision comes approximately 19 months after the onset of conflict in Sudan, particularly highlighting the atrocities committed in the Darfur region against non-Arab tribes. The resolution, originally introduced by Senator John James and supported by Senators Ben Cardin and Cory Booker, marks a pivotal shift in the US stance on the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Sudan.
The resolution's passage is seen as a potential turning point for the future of RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as "Hemedti." Observers believe that this legislative action could influence the trajectory of the conflict and the humanitarian situation in Sudan, especially if it gains support from the Senate and is ratified by the incoming Trump administration. Representative James emphasized the dire humanitarian conditions in West Darfur, detailing the high death toll and the looming threat of famine affecting displaced persons and refugees.
Implications of the Resolution
The unanimous approval of this resolution by the House of Representatives is viewed as a qualitative development in US foreign policy. If the Senate also approves the resolution, it will be sent to the White House for presidential ratification, potentially leading to significant changes in US engagement with Sudan. Should the president refuse to ratify it, the resolution would remain non-binding, serving merely as a political statement.
Human rights activists, such as Suleiman Abdel Salam, argue that this congressional position could lead to sanctions against Hemedti and his supporters, thereby disrupting their access to weapons and resources. Furthermore, this move may encourage European parliaments to adopt similar stances, possibly classifying the RSF as a terrorist organization and referring the situation to the UN Security Council and the International Criminal Court, reminiscent of actions taken in 2005 regarding the Darfur crisis.
Critics, including Sudanese lawyer Tariq Abdel Fattah, caution that while the resolution reflects a strong political stance, its impact on actual US foreign policy will depend on the actions of the State Department. He notes that previous resolutions declaring genocide in Sudan have not led to significant changes in policy, underscoring the need for a coordinated response from the US government.
