Por Renan Filho · 2026-09-28**Lead**
The United States has imposed new visa restrictions on Sudanese military and paramilitary leaders, escalating a diplomatic confrontation that underscores the international community’s failure to address a war that has raged for over two years. The move, announced by the State Department in late September 2026, targets individuals from both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) who are deemed to be obstructing humanitarian access and peace negotiations. The visa ban exposes a forgotten conflict that has become a proxy battleground for foreign powers—including Russia, the United Arab Emirates, and Ukraine—each seeking a strategic foothold in the resource-rich nation.
**Context**
The civil war in Sudan erupted in April 2023 when long-simmering tensions between the SAF, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the RSF, commanded by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (known as Hemedti), exploded into open fighting. The conflict has devastated the capital Khartoum, triggered ethnic violence in Darfur, and pushed the country to the brink of famine. According to reports from the United Nations and humanitarian organizations, the war has created one of the world’s largest displacement crises, with millions fleeing their homes and neighboring countries struggling to absorb refugees.
Despite multiple rounds of peace talks brokered by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and the African Union, a lasting ceasefire has remained elusive. Both sides have been accused of war crimes, including indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas, sexual violence, and the use of starvation as a weapon of war. The International Criminal Court has opened investigations into atrocities committed in Darfur, where the RSF and allied militias have been implicated in mass killings.
The visa restrictions are the latest tool in Washington’s effort to pressure the warring parties. The State Department has stated that the measures apply to individuals who have “undermined the peace process, blocked humanitarian aid, or committed serious human rights abuses.” The ban also extends to family members of those targeted. While the US has not released a full list of names, diplomatic sources indicate that senior commanders from both the SAF and RSF are included.
The visa clash comes at a time when Sudan’s war is increasingly being shaped by external actors. Russia has maintained ties with both sides, seeking to secure access to Sudan’s Red Sea ports and gold mines. The Wagner Group—now rebranded under state control—has been reported to provide military support to the SAF in exchange for mining concessions. Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates has been accused by UN experts of supplying weapons to the RSF, a charge Abu Dhabi denies. Ukraine, which has its own conflict with Russia, has reportedly deployed special forces to Sudan to target Wagner-linked assets, adding another layer of complexity to the proxy war.
**Analysis**
The visa dispute is more than a diplomatic spat; it reflects the international community’s growing frustration with the lack of progress toward peace. The United States, which has invested significant diplomatic capital in Sudan since the 2019 revolution that ousted Omar al-Bashir, now finds its influence waning as other powers deepen their involvement. The Biden administration has struggled to maintain a coherent policy, caught between the desire to hold perpetrators accountable and the need to keep lines of communication open with both sides.
The forgotten war in Sudan is a strategic prize for multiple reasons. The country sits on the Red Sea, one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes, and controls access to the Nile River. It possesses vast agricultural potential, gold reserves, and other minerals. For Russia, a foothold in Sudan offers a warm-water port and a base to project power into Africa and the Middle East. For the UAE, influence in Sudan aligns with its broader strategy in the Horn of Africa, including its involvement in Yemen and the Red Sea security architecture. Ukraine’s interest is primarily tactical: disrupting Russian operations wherever they occur.
The visa restrictions, while symbolic, are unlikely to force a breakthrough. Both al-Burhan and Hemedti have shown little willingness to compromise, and the flow of weapons and money from external patrons continues. The United Nations has warned that the humanitarian situation is deteriorating, with more than half the population facing acute food insecurity. Aid agencies have repeatedly reported that both sides block relief convoys and loot supplies.
The international response has been fragmented. The African Union has been largely sidelined, and the Arab League has failed to take a unified stance. The United Nations Security Council remains paralyzed by veto-wielding members, including Russia, which has blocked resolutions that would impose sanctions on the warring parties. The US visa ban, while a clear signal, is a limited tool. Without broader economic sanctions, an arms embargo, or a coordinated diplomatic push, the war is likely to continue grinding on.
**Fontes**
This report is based on information from the following sources: United States Department of State official statements; United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) situation reports; Reuters news agency; Associated Press; Al Jazeera; and reports by the UN Panel of Experts on Sudan. Additional context drawn from analyses by the International Crisis Group and the Atlantic Council.