Chemical Weapons Allegations Put the Burhan Government to the Test By Hafiz Yousif Hamoda

07:39 PM February, 11 2026

Sudanese Online
حافظ يوسف حمودة-Sudan
My Library
Short URL

Chemical Weapons Allegations Put the Burhan Government to the Test

By Hafiz Yousif Hamoda

November 12, 2026

An investigative report by Sky News Arabia has reopened one of the most perilous files in Sudan’s ongoing war, alleging that the Sudanese army has used chemical weapons prohibited under international law against civilians. The report—based on clandestine interviews and video-documented field testimonies—concluded that the atypical burn patterns observed on victims’ bodies are consistent, according to experts, with injuries caused by internationally banned chemical agents. Its publication coincided with a U.S. report and Washington’s announcement of sanctions tied to chemical weapons use, even as the Burhan government rejects any independent international fact-finding missions. This convergence of media scrutiny and diplomatic action places the Port Sudan–based authorities under an international microscope and raises fundamental questions about responsibility, transparency, and the future of civilians who are paying the highest price.

The use of chemical weapons constitutes a grave international crime under the Chemical Weapons Convention and international humanitarian law. Unlike conventional arms, chemical weapons elevate a conflict to a qualitatively different level of danger: they are inherently indiscriminate, harming civilians and combatants alike, and they leave long-term health and environmental effects that can degrade local ecosystems, water sources, and soil for years. Consequently, even well-founded suspicion of their use triggers unprecedented legal and public accountability for the state concerned.

The U.S. report and sanctions appear as a logical extension of the Sky News Arabia findings, signaling the emergence of a convergent international narrative: that chemical weapons use in Sudan is becoming a dossier under political and legal documentation. U.S. sanctions carry serious implications. They pave the way for broader multilateral sanctions; constrain any future attempt to remove Sudan from international watchlists; and jeopardize prospects for reconstruction and financial support. More troubling still, the Sudanese government’s refusal to allow international investigation does not weaken the allegations in the eyes of the international community—it reinforces them, as such refusal is often read as an effort to avoid disclosure of the truth.

Politically, these allegations confront the Burhan government with three simultaneous and difficult crises. First, a crisis of international legitimacy: any government accused of employing prohibited weapons forfeits a substantial measure of international acceptance, even among potential partners. Second, a negotiation crisis: the issue will serve as powerful leverage in future political or military negotiations, whether within Sudan or with external actors. Third, the risk of personal accountability: should responsibility or complicity be established, the matter may shift from sanctions on state institutions to individual accountability for named military and political leaders.

From a humanitarian perspective, the most alarming dimension is the long-term, devastating impact on civilians in affected areas. Beyond immediate casualties, the consequences include chronic dermatological and respiratory illnesses, sharp increases in cancer rates, miscarriages and congenital anomalies, and the near-collapse of local diagnostic and treatment capacities. This reality poses profound ethical and legal dilemmas regarding the future of voluntary returns by internally displaced persons and refugees. In the absence of independent investigations, public identification of contaminated zones, environmental remediation programs, or routine health surveillance, returning civilians to areas that may be chemically contaminated becomes an undertaking fraught with severe risk—particularly in the context of poorly understood illnesses and numerous unexplained deaths. Voluntary or forced returns conducted without adequate guarantees could amount to the deliberate endangerment of civilian life—a responsibility borne by the de facto authorities and the international community alike.

The allegation of chemical weapons use in Sudan—as reflected in the Sky News Arabia report, its convergence with U.S. reporting, and the imposition of U.S. sanctions—marks a dangerous inflection point in the trajectory of the Sudanese crisis. Persisting in denial and rejecting investigation will not shield the Burhan government from consequences; rather, it will deepen its international isolation, magnify risks to unprotected civilians, and imperil prospects for any political settlement or a safe return to normal life. Ultimately, the most pressing question remains: who will protect Sudan’s civilians when the instruments of war themselves are prohibited under international law؟

Nov 12, 2026