As Sudan marks two years of brutal civil war, foreign powers fuel the bloodshed while peace talks stall and civilians suffer in silence.

Two years into Sudan’s devastating civil war, the death toll mounts, millions are displaced, and outside powers pour in weapons. With no peace in sight, this forgotten conflict risks exploding across the Horn of Africa. 

It began on April 15, 2023 — a power struggle between two armed men that has now devolved into one of the deadliest and most neglected wars on earth. But Sudan’s war is no longer about two generals. It’s about a nation on fire, a people abandoned, and a global community complicit in silence.

Khartoum, once the beating heart of Sudan, has become a battleground of smoke, starvation, and shattered lives. In just two years, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have turned the country into a graveyard. Over 60,000 are believed dead. Over 14 million have fled their homes. More than 30 million are in urgent need of aid. And yet, the world shrugs.

Sudan’s War Is Not a Crisis — It’s a Catastrophe Ignored

What makes Sudan’s descent so uniquely tragic is the cynical choreography behind it. This isn’t just a civil war — it’s a proxy war. Foreign governments have chosen their warlords and are feeding them weapons: Saudi Arabia backing SAF’s al-Burhan, the UAE reportedly arming the RSF’s Hemedti through Chad. Egypt, Libya, Iran, and Russia each have stakes in the chaos. Sudan isn’t just bleeding — it’s being bled for influence.

Even worse, Sudan has become the battlefield for Middle East rivalries playing out thousands of miles away. The power vacuum left by Omar al-Bashir’s fall in 2019 became fertile ground for regional kingmakers and shadow donors. Civilians now pay the price for alliances they never asked for and battles they never started.

Meanwhile, peace talks are little more than political theatre. Jeddah, Switzerland, Addis — all have hosted failed negotiations, stifled by foreign interests and lack of neutrality. The UN left in 2024. There is no peacekeeping force, no humanitarian corridors, no international protection. Calls for “green zones” have gone unanswered. Children are dying in bombed-out hospitals. Entire towns are wiped off the map. Aid workers are targeted. And the African Union stands paralyzed.

The Sudanese war isn’t just a human tragedy. It’s a geopolitical warning shot. As the RSF creeps westward and SAF targets airports in Chad, the risk of regional spillover grows dangerously real. Eritrea, Ethiopia, South Sudan — all sit on the edge of a firestorm.

Sudan is the canary in the coal mine of Africa’s security. And right now, the canary is dying.

The world may be watching Gaza, Ukraine, and the Red Sea — but in Sudan, a slow-motion genocide is unfolding in the dark. If nothing changes, it won’t be long before Sudan’s war becomes the Horn of Africa’s collapse.

The time to act was yesterday. The price of inaction will be catastrophic tomorrow.

Study Reveals Sudan’s Civil War Death Toll Far Higher Than Previously Reported

Sudan’s Man-Made Famine: A Humanitarian Crisis in a Conflict-Ravaged Nation

Sexual Violence Used as Weapon of War Throughout Conflict in Sudan

Humanitarian Crisis in Sudan Escalates Amid Looming Famine

Why El Fasher’s Battle Is Crucial to Sudan’s Future

Ethnic Cleansing Unleashed in Darfur: Sudanese Paramilitary Forces Accused of Horrific Atrocities

People eating ‘grass and peanut shells’ in Darfur, UN says, as hunger crisis engulfs war-ravaged Sudan

Sudan’s Military Repels Assault by Paramilitary Forces in el-Fasher

What’s Sudan like after 15 months of war, displacement, and inhumanity?

At Least 85 Killed in Sudan Village Attack by Paramilitary Forces

Sudan’s Al-Burhan Rejects Peace Talks, Promises to Fight for a Century

Human Rights Watch Accuses Sudan’s RSF of War Crimes in South Kordofan

Understanding the Urgency: Why the World Must Pay Closer Attention to Sudan

Sudan’s Power Shift: Army Captures Presidential Palace Amidst National Crisis

A Deep Dive into the Roots of Sudan’s Civil War and Its Impact on Regional Stability

US Sanctions Sudan Army Leader, Citing Atrocities

How Militia Groups Capture States and Ruin Countries: The Case of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces

More Than 120 Killed in Paramilitary Rampage in Sudan

Nile Waters Divide Widens as Egypt and Sudan Reject New Basin Agreement

World Bank Cuts 2024 Growth Forecast for sub-Saharan Africa Over Sudan

South Sudan — The Specter of Civil War Looms Again

Sudan Punishes Kenya for Hosting RSF Group by Suspending all Imports

Sudan: U.S. Withdraws Nonessential Staff Amid Escalating Tensions

Sudanese Opposition Leader Detained in Kenya on Interpol Warrant

How a Key Ingredient in Coca-Cola, M&M’s is Smuggled From War-torn Sudan

Russia’s Red Sea Base in Sudan: A Geopolitical Time Bomb

Sudanese Warlords Likely To Be No-Shows at Geneva Peace Talks

Israeli Officials Warn of “Intolerable” Egyptian Violations as Cairo Expands Forces, Ports, and Airfields in Defiance of Camp David Accords.

Tensions rise as Egypt quietly escalates military presence in Sinai. Israeli security officials warn that Cairo’s moves violate the peace agreement—calling on the U.S. to intervene before it’s too late.

Egypt is expanding its military footprint in the Sinai Peninsula, pushing beyond the force limits established in the 1979 Camp David peace accords. And while tanks can retreat, trust doesn’t reverse as easily.

According to a high-level Israeli security source, Egypt has quietly deployed forces in excess of the permitted quota, constructed new port facilities, and extended runways at key airbases—turning Sinai into a potential launchpad rather than a demilitarized buffer.

The implications? Explosive.

For decades, the Israeli-Egyptian peace deal—backed by billions in U.S. military aid—stood as a rare pillar of stability in the region. Now, that fragile architecture is under strain. “Israel will not accept the situation and will not tolerate violations from Cairo,” the security source told reporters, bluntly.

Let’s be clear: this is not just about tanks or jets—it’s about intent. Cairo’s incremental militarization of Sinai looks more strategic than reactive. Is Egypt posturing for regional leverage? Or is it laying groundwork for a future showdown, possibly against Israel or to support proxy operations in Gaza?

What’s worse is Washington’s relative silence. As the broker and guarantor of the Camp David agreement, the U.S. is legally and diplomatically obligated to enforce the terms. Yet as Egypt redraws the lines in the sand, American influence appears paralyzed.

Back in February, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S., Yechiel Leiter, called Cairo’s buildup “intolerable” and warned that Jerusalem would soon raise the issue “very firmly.” Now, with Egypt doubling down, the question is whether Israel will act—diplomatically or otherwise.

This isn’t a drill. When peace agreements become optional, war becomes inevitable. If the U.S. fails to hold Egypt accountable, Israel may be forced to consider options no one wants on the table.

Sinai is no longer quiet. And the peace is no longer guaranteed.

US Africa Command (AFRICOM) has executed targeted strikes against ISIS positions in Somalia’s Puntland region, southeast of Bosaso. Conducted in coordination with Somalia’s government, this operation highlights the escalating threat ISIS poses to American forces and broader regional stability.

The March 29 strikes, as detailed in AFRICOM’s official statement, targeted militant positions deemed threatening to US military personnel and interests in the strategically critical Horn of Africa. While the US provided limited operational details, the timing and location underscore significant geopolitical maneuvers unfolding in the region.

Notably, these airstrikes occur just one day after a controversial diplomatic offer from Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud to President Donald Trump was leaked. Mohamud proposed granting the US “exclusive operational control” over strategic assets—including Bosaso port and airbase and Somaliland’s Berbera port—in a desperate bid to bolster US involvement and counteract regional instability.

However, this diplomatic overture sparked immediate controversy, especially since these assets remain outside Mogadishu’s control. The recent US military actions, striking precisely near these contested sites, signify a robust American posture in response to ISIS threats while simultaneously underscoring the complex interplay between US strategic interests and Somalia’s fragile sovereignty.

Washington’s strikes and Somalia’s provocative diplomatic offers reveal the growing urgency in controlling critical Horn of Africa maritime routes against terrorist threats and international rivals.

Will intensified US military actions stabilize Somalia, or could they further inflame regional tensions, reshaping the strategic balance in this geopolitically sensitive corridor?

Poland has made an explosive declaration, announcing a dramatic military buildup amid mounting fears of a Russian invasion. Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s ambitious plan aims to prepare every adult male in the country for potential conflict, transforming Polish society into a battle-ready state virtually overnight.

In a provocative move, Tusk has declared that Poland will more than double its military force to an astonishing half-million troops and rapidly train millions of reservists. “We must be ready,” he warned, highlighting Poland’s vulnerable geographic position, sandwiched between Russia and its close ally Belarus.

The urgency behind Poland’s militarization underscores its deep historical distrust of Moscow—a sentiment intensified by Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine. With Warsaw already spending 4.7% of its GDP—the highest defense budget within NATO—and rapidly acquiring advanced weaponry, the message is crystal clear: Poland is preparing to defend itself aggressively.

The ambitious training program seeks to rapidly equip civilians with combat skills, offering everything from short-term crash courses in basic military tactics and civil defense to comprehensive month-long training programs. Polish authorities plan to train at least 100,000 people by 2026, prioritizing younger, physically capable reservists.

But critics warn Poland’s preparation might still be insufficient, arguing that 100,000 reservists per year isn’t nearly enough. Retired military generals suggest bringing back compulsory conscription immediately, pointing to Russia’s substantial military build-up near NATO borders as evidence of imminent danger.

Simultaneously, Polish citizens’ reactions are fiercely divided. While many express readiness and eagerness to defend their homeland against perceived Russian aggression, fueled by visceral hatred towards Russian President Vladimir Putin, others question whether the country truly deserves their sacrifice, citing socio-economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and steep mortgage rates.

Meanwhile, Tusk’s administration is rolling out incentives to attract citizens into military training programs, offering practical civilian benefits such as cybersecurity and medical training, alongside financial incentives and tax breaks.

With Poland firmly stepping onto a war footing, waryatv.com readers must ask: Is this rapid militarization a prudent precaution or a dangerous provocation? Only time—and Russia’s next move—will tell.

UN Takes Over: James Swan Becomes De Facto President as Somalia’s Government Collapses Amid Turkish Expansion.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has officially appointed James Swan—the seasoned American diplomat—as the new, unofficial president of Somalia, assuming full control through the United Nations Interim Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNTMIS).

This dramatic appointment underscores a historic failure of Somalia’s government under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, who now effectively becomes the “former failed president.” Despite billions of dollars poured into Somalia by the international community over the past three decades, Mogadishu’s regime remains mired in corruption, incompetence, and a growing threat from insurgents like Al-Shabab.

James Swan’s return isn’t merely diplomatic—it is a direct intervention, a bold UN-led takeover designed to rescue Somalia from spiraling into total chaos. Swan, experienced in navigating Africa’s toughest diplomatic challenges, steps into the role amidst rising panic from Western powers over Turkey’s aggressive expansion in Somalia.

Western nations, especially the United States and European Union, fear losing Somalia entirely to Turkish President Erdogan, whose government already controls Mogadishu’s critical infrastructure, including ports and airports. Erdogan’s recent pledge of increased military support to Somalia has triggered alarm bells in Washington and Brussels, signaling Turkey’s broader ambition to dominate strategic points in the Horn of Africa.

Swan’s appointment is thus a strategic countermove, positioning him as Somalia’s actual leader while the international community scrambles for a long-term solution. Officially labeled as a UN envoy, Swan’s influence now eclipses Somalia’s formal government, marking an unprecedented shift in governance.

Waryatv.com readers are witnessing history: the UN has effectively assumed governance of a failed state, with Swan at its helm as the West desperately counters Turkey’s geopolitical ambitions. The coming months will be pivotal: Can Swan stabilize Somalia, or is the region set to become a battleground between the West and Turkey?

Stay tuned—Somalia’s future, and perhaps the Horn of Africa’s stability, hangs by a thread as James Swan takes charge.

Boualem Sansal sentenced to five years under anti-terrorism laws after questioning Algeria-Morocco borders, drawing fierce criticism from France.

Renowned French-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal has been sentenced to five years in prison by an Algerian court under contentious “anti-terrorism” laws, further inflaming diplomatic tensions between Algeria and France. Sansal, an outspoken critic of the Algerian government, was charged with “undermining national unity” after remarks he made questioning colonial-era border divisions with regional rival Morocco.

The verdict, delivered on Thursday in Dar El Beida near Algiers, stemmed from an interview Sansal gave to French far-right outlet Frontieres last October. Sansal argued that France had unfairly redrawn Algeria’s borders during colonial times, incorporating Moroccan territory—remarks seen as incendiary by Algerian authorities.

French President Emmanuel Macron swiftly condemned the decision, publicly appealing to Algeria’s sense of “good sense and humanity,” citing Sansal’s reported battle with cancer. The imprisonment of the celebrated author, winner of the 2011 Peace Prize of the German Book Trade, has added fuel to already strained Franco-Algerian relations, following France’s recent diplomatic shift to support Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara.

Sansal, who represented himself in court, denied that his comments violated Algerian law or intended harm to national unity. Legal experts suggest his sentence, half of what prosecutors initially sought, still reflects severe judicial overreach and may serve as political leverage amid Algeria’s diplomatic feud with France.

Human rights advocates warn that Algeria continues to misuse stringent anti-terrorism laws to silence critical voices, raising fears over the broader implications for freedom of speech. As international pressure mounts, speculation grows that Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune could grant Sansal a presidential pardon during an upcoming national holiday, attempting to defuse escalating tensions with Paris.

Rising military tensions and unresolved grievances push Ethiopia and Eritrea closer to renewed conflict in the Horn of Africa.

Less than seven years after peace was declared, Ethiopia and Eritrea appear to be on a dangerous collision course once again. Rising military mobilizations, inflamed rhetoric, and historical grievances have raised fears that these longtime adversaries could soon reignite conflict, destabilizing an already fragile Horn of Africa.

Tensions flared in recent months as Eritrea reportedly ramped up military conscription and Ethiopia deployed troops along its northern border. Ethiopian Airlines, a symbolic link reopened during the 2018 peace deal, abruptly suspended flights after Eritrea froze its bank accounts without explanation—a troubling diplomatic signal.

Ethiopia’s Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, insists that his country’s quest for maritime access—cut off after Eritrea’s independence—is peaceful. Yet, Eritrean officials, including Foreign Minister Osman Saleh, condemn Ethiopia’s ambitions as “misguided” and provocative. Addis Ababa’s persistent talk of regaining sea access, particularly the strategic port city of Assab, fuels mistrust in Asmara.

Central to the escalating tensions is Ethiopia’s embattled Tigray region, recently torn apart by civil war. Although Eritrea joined Ethiopia against Tigray’s rebel TPLF, the subsequent peace negotiations excluded Asmara, stoking resentment. The situation worsened when a splinter faction of TPLF seized key Tigrayan cities and was accused of collaborating covertly with Eritrea—charges that Eritrea vehemently denies.

The threat of renewed war has prompted urgent calls from international observers, former envoys, and regional bodies like the African Union, warning that current hostilities represent “dry tinder waiting for a match.” Amid this tense environment, residents of Tigray queue desperately at banks, seeking cash to flee what many fear is an inevitable conflict.

Ethiopia’s diplomatic friction extends further, angering Somalia over a separate port deal with Somaliland, while Eritrea aligns with Ethiopia’s rivals, Somalia and Egypt, increasing regional polarization.

As both Ethiopia and Eritrea edge closer to confrontation, only robust international mediation can defuse the ticking time bomb threatening to plunge the Horn of Africa into another catastrophic war.

Russian leader suggests placing Ukraine under temporary UN-led administration with involvement from North Korea and BRICS countries.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has outlined a provocative and controversial peace proposal aimed at ending the ongoing three-year war in Ukraine, calling for Ukraine’s placement under a “temporary administration” overseen by the United Nations, with mediation from North Korea and BRICS countries, including China, India, Brazil, and South Africa.

Speaking to servicemen in Russia’s northern port city of Murmansk, Putin suggested the establishment of an international interim government to oversee Ukraine until new elections could establish a “capable and trusted” administration. Under this arrangement, Ukraine would be guided toward signing key peace accords with Moscow.

Yet, Putin’s call to involve North Korea—widely viewed as a rogue state by Western powers—has triggered immediate skepticism and controversy. His emphasis on participation from BRICS nations, many of whom have maintained neutrality or hesitancy regarding Russia’s invasion, signals Moscow’s attempt to reshape diplomatic alliances and legitimize its geopolitical strategy in Ukraine.

“We support resolving these issues peacefully,” Putin claimed, but insisted that “original causes” of the war must first be addressed—a reference often made by Moscow to justify its February 2022 invasion.

Critics argue Putin’s peace plan is a thinly-veiled attempt to impose Russia’s will through international channels, particularly by involving allies known for their alignment or neutrality toward Moscow’s actions. With North Korea’s inclusion, the proposal becomes politically charged, undermining its acceptance by Western nations and Ukraine itself.

This bold move indicates Russia’s ongoing effort to realign international diplomacy around its war objectives, rather than signaling genuine readiness for a negotiated settlement that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty.