This week, the United States accused the RSF militia in Sudan’s brutal civil conflict of committing genocide.

It’s the second time in two decades that genocide has been declared in the northeast African nation, where thousands have died and millions are in the grip of a humanitarian crisis.

How did the country get here?

For 20 months, two of Sudan’s most powerful generals – Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, leader of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), and Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemedti, who heads the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) – have viciously competed for territory in a country still reeling from the massacre of tens of thousands of people in the early 2000s and the displacement of millions more.

Sudan’s top army general Abdel Fattah al-Burhan speaks during a press conference in 2021.

The RSF’s Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemedti, is seen in Khartoum in 2023.

The two men – former allies – jointly ousted President Omar al-Bashir from office in 2019. Together, they also contributed to another coup in 2021 when al-Burhan seized power from the country’s transitional government.

Today, Sudan is riven by conflict, with the RSF believed to be in control of much of the country’s western and central regions, including Darfur and parts of the capital Khartoum.

More than 11 million people have been internally displaced since the fighting erupted in April 2023, according to the United Nations, while millions more have fled Sudan.

Hunger is widespread and famine conditions are now present in several areas of the country, the UN has warned.

Who has been cited as responsible?

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Tuesday that Hemedti’s RSF and its allied Arab militias had perpetrated “direct attacks against civilians” including the systematic murder of “men and boys – even infants – on an ethnic basis.”

They also “deliberately targeted women and girls from certain ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal sexual violence,” Blinken said, adding that the same forces “targeted fleeing civilians, murdering innocent people escaping conflict, and prevented remaining civilians from accessing lifesaving supplies.”

“Based on this information, I have now concluded that members of the RSF and allied militias have committed genocide in Sudan,” he announced.

The RSF described the decision by the US as “unjust,” adding in a statement on its Telegram channel that “the State Department’s claim that the RSF committed genocide in Sudan is inaccurate.”

“The decision fails to specify the group against which the alleged genocide was committed or the location of the genocide … The decision vaguely refers to the Sudanese people, of whom RSF fighters and supporters are an integral part,” the RSF statement said.

The RSF has a history connected to ethnic-driven violence. The paramilitary group grew out of the Arab Janjaweed militia that oversaw the genocide of the early 2000s. That carnage left an estimated 300,000 people dead.

Since fighting erupted in mid-April 2023 between the RSF and the SAF, ethnically motivated killings have intensified, particularly in the western Darfur region. This mirrors the pattern of targeted killings that typified the first genocide.

West Darfur witnessed some of its worst ethnic-related killings in 2023, when hundreds of people from non-Arab ethnic groups were massacred by the RSF and forces linked to it. On Tuesday, the US imposed sanctions on their leader Hemedti, “for his role in systematic atrocities committed against the Sudanese people,” and sanctioned seven RSF-linked companies and one individual “for their roles in procuring weapons for the RSF.”

Are both warring factions complicit in abuses?

In September last year, a United Nations fact-finding mission accused both the SAF and the RSF of complicity in war crimes.

And in his statement, Blinken laid blame for abuses at the door of both parties. “The United States does not support either side of this war, and these actions against Hemedti and the RSF do not signify support or favor for the SAF,” he said. “Both belligerents bear responsibility for the violence and suffering in Sudan and lack the legitimacy to govern a future peaceful Sudan.”

In Darfur, she said, where she has worked for over 20 years, sexual violence has been “used as a tool of terror to force communities to submit to the RSF,” – a pattern seen in previous conflicts that has been replicated by the militia group, she claimed.

“It’s the same method and strategy,” she said of the alleged sexual crimes. “It’s also used for retaliation in their war against SAF and it has ethnic elements to it.”

Al-Karib said that between October and January, her organization had handled cases of at least 10 girls, some as young as 14, who took their own lives after being gang-raped by RSF militia men in Sudan’s Al Jazira state. This had followed the defection of an RSF commander in the area to SAF, she said.

“The RSF has been completely emboldened by impunity, a lack of accountability, and the fact that they were not seriously subjected to any sort of accountability,” she said, welcoming the US sanctions against Hemedti.

Civilians and aid agencies have also borne the brunt of frequent shelling and staged raids by the Sudanese army and the RSF – targeting civilian areas and causing multiple casualties.

Last month, more than 100 people were killed after bombs fell on a crowded market in North Darfur. In the same month, three staff members of the World Food Programme (WFP) were killed in an airstrike on the agency’s office in Blue Nile State, wrapping up “the deadliest year on record for aid workers in Sudan,” the UN said.

Dozens of airstrikes with multiple fatalities are reported daily by Sudanese media. A senior procurement official who led the SAF’s acquisition of arms was sanctioned by the US last October.

The RSF and the Sudanese military typically blame one each other for such attacks, with a recent statement from the RSF criticizing the US for overlooking “widespread atrocities committed by the SAF, including aerial bombardments that have claimed the lives of more than 4,000 civilians.”

What is the impact on civilians?

Before the deadly power tussle erupted between the SAF and the RSF, Sudan already ranked among the world’s poorest countries with decades of conflict hindering its economic growth.

Their war, now in its second year, has displaced more than 11 million people within Sudan, while some 3.2 million others have fled to neighboring countries, according to UN figures.

Some of those unable to flee are harbored in Darfur’s Zanzam camp, where famine was declared last month. The camp, home to around half a million displaced people, has also come under RSF bombardment.

Hunger in Darfur has sometimes forced people to eat “grass and peanut shells” to survive, the then WFP regional director for Eastern Africa, Michael Dunford, said last year, amid warnings by the UN that some 26 million Sudanese were facing acute hunger.

Food deliveries to Darfur resumed last August after a key border crossing was reopened by authorities for aid to enter Sudan. But in parts of Darfur, aid organizations are still impeded by restrictions and famine conditions area spreading to additional areas, a UN report said this week.

On Friday, humanitarian group Médecins Sans Frontières, or, Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said it was suspending activities at one of the last operating hospitals in the RSF-controlled south Khartoum, citing recurring attacks from armed fighters.

“The medical needs are overwhelming. Injuries are often horrific. Mass casualty incidents have become almost routine,” MSF’s Emergency Coordinator, Claire San Filippo said in a statement.

How has the world responded to the war?

The Sudanese conflict has been largely overshadowed by hostilities in other parts of the world such as in Ukraine and Gaza, International Monetary Fund chief Kristalina Georgieva said last year.

However, warring factions in the African nation have also defied global efforts to end the conflict.

Last month, Blinken told the UN Security Council that foreign actors were fueling the war in Sudan, but he did not name who they were.

“To the foreign sponsors sending drones, missiles, mercenaries – enough. To those profiting off the illicit oil and gold trade that fund this conflict – enough,” he said.

Sudan’s military government has frequently accused the United Arab Emirates of arming the RSF, but the Gulf nation denies this. The seven RSF-linked companies that were sanctioned by the US on Tuesday are all based in the UAE.

In November, Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that called on Sudan’s warring factions to end the fighting, strengthen protections for civilians and allow the delivery of humanitarian aid. Sudan’s military-backed foreign ministry welcomed Russia’s action, saying the UN resolution undermined Sudan’s sovereignty.

Will the US genocide determination make a difference?

Nonetheless, it is “a form of justice because it recognizes victims’ grievances,” he said.

“It is a step towards peace and accountability by paving the way to hold actors responsible to account, not only perpetrators themselves but actors complicit in genocide,” added Ali, a legal adviser at the Canada-based Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights.

For activist Al-Karib, US sanctions against Hemedti and the declaration of genocide could be crucial in not only reining in his militia but also curbing the support he receives from foreign actors.

“We don’t think that the scale of these atrocities happening in Sudan and Darfur would have been this big without the support of the UAE to the RSF,” she said.

“So, we hope that the US decision to sanction Hemedti will send a strong message to the UAE to rethink its position and engage in a serious political process to end these atrocities and genocidal acts happening across the country.”

The British royal family has historically played a vital role in strengthening ties between the United States and United Kingdom, keeping the so-called “special relationship” between the two countries alive.

And as Elon Musk, one of US President-elect Donald Trump’s closest allies, scraps with the UK’s government, some believe Britain could be making more use of one of its oldest diplomatic assets. Even this week, Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh, visited the US on behalf of the King to pay his respects to former President Jimmy Carter, who died aged 100 in December.

It could therefore be of some comfort to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who is keen to build trust with the Trump administration, that the incoming president has a soft spot for the clan, particularly the late Queen Elizabeth II.

In 2019, following his last state visit to the UK, Trump delivered a flurry of compliments directed at members of the family. “I have such a great relationship, and we were laughing and having fun,” Trump told Fox News just after the trip to London, when he met the late Queen.

Trump particularly admires the family’s celebrity and the way they represent a more traditional social authority, according to Ed Owens, a royal historian and author of “After Elizabeth: Can the Monarchy Save Itself?”

More recently, Trump made equally flattering comments about the heir to the British throne, Prince William, whom he met in Paris at the reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral in December. “He’s doing a fantastic job,” Trump said of William, calling him a “good man.”

“I had a great talk with the prince,” Trump later told The New York Post. “He’s a good-looking guy… He looked really very handsome last night. Some people look better in person. He looked great. He looked really nice, and I told him that.”

‘The UK can use the royals strategically’

Trump’s gushing remarks about William – although perhaps not the most typical display of diplomacy – will be welcomed by those concerned about the future of UK-US relations, particularly as prominent figures in the governing Labour party have previously hit out against the divisive incoming president.

“Keir Starmer and Donald Trump don’t see eye to eye on everything, or at least they’re not going to see eye to eye on everything,” Owens said, adding that the royals “can, in a way, distract from that fact.”

“The fact that (Trump) is deferential to the British royal family, impressed by them, I think that bodes well for the UK, if the UK can use the royals strategically,” he said.

Royal commentator and author Sally Bedell Smith agreed that the family can “conceivably play a role in softening the atmosphere, which is pretty tense right now.”

This “soft power” influence is nothing new. Generations of royals have been helping to keep the bond between the UK and US tight.

Famously, in the early 1960s, as the youthful John F. Kennedy came into power, the royal family helped the UK to strengthen its links with this “new, dynamic, exciting America” at a time when Britain felt like a “slightly outdated place,” Owens added.

However, in the modern age there is little doubt that Trump and key members of the royal clan will not agree on everything, notably the need to take action to tackle climate change.

Both Prince William and his father, King Charles III, have been vocal advocates for climate action. Meanwhile, Trump successfully campaigned on a three-word energy policy – “Drill, baby, drill” – and recently said that he wants a policy where no windmills are being built across the country.

These strong views will not stop the royals speaking out about issues they believe in, Owens said, but there is a limit to their influence. “I don’t imagine that the King is going to give up, he’s going to continue to emphasize the importance of (climate action),” he said.

“But he will do so delicately. He knows that he has no serious role to play in American politics,” Owens added.

While the British royals may have no official role in US politics, the soft power they yield will help to smooth a potentially bumpy road between Washington and London, and is a vital part of the UK government’s strategy for ensuring the bonds between the two countries remain strong.

In the capital of Transnistria, a self-declared microstate sandwiched between Moldova and Ukraine, the festive New Year’s lights have gone dark ahead of schedule. This separatist sliver of Moldova will run out of energy in three weeks, the head of its Russia-backed government has said.

Once proud, go-it-alone and richer than their neighbors in Moldova proper, Transnistrians are now burning wood to keep warm through hours-long blackouts as winter bites.

The crunch began when Moscow stopped pumping natural gas through pipelines in Ukraine to Europe. Transnistrian officials have declared a state of emergency. They say their region is facing “not only an energy crisis, but a humanitarian one.” Analysts say this understates the problem, which has raised questions about the future of the de facto state.

Here’s what you need to know.

How did the crisis start?

For years, Russian gas flowed through Ukraine to Moldova and elsewhere in Europe. The last transit agreement with Kyiv, signed before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, was due to expire on January 1. Ukraine said for months it would not renew the agreement – and made good on its promise.

Some countries prepared for this. Austria said it did its “homework” and now sources gas elsewhere. Hungary and Slovakia have also found alternative, much costlier, supplies.

Transnistria did not. After splitting from Moldova in 1990 as the Soviet Union crumbled, Transnistria has relied entirely on Russian gas – delivered through Ukraine’s pipelines, mostly free of charge – to keep the lights on.

That’s over. With Russia unwilling to send gas via other routes, Transnistria is going dark.

How has Transnistria been affected?

Home to more than 300,000 people – mostly Russian speakers – Transnistria celebrated Orthodox Christmas on Tuesday. The usually festive occasion was interrupted by the region’s self-proclaimed government announcing daily eight-hour power outages.

The government said it took the decision after electricity consumption had jumped fourfold in recent days. With no gas to keep homes warm, residents had turned to electric heaters – putting huge strain on the region’s creaking power grid.

“The system created during the Soviet period… is not coping,” President Vadim Krasnoselsky said at a meeting of the region’s energy council on Monday. He urged residents to use electric heating “selectively.”

Videos posted online show a glimpse of how residents are coping. Transnistrians are cooking meals on electric mini-stoves and burning firewood and coal to heat their homes. Hot water is now supplied on a strict schedule, causing some to boil water in kettles and take showers using buckets.

Some alternative heating methods have proved hazardous. Orthodox Christmas was marked by two cases of carbon monoxide poisoning, one of them fatal.

On Tuesday, a family of four in the city of Bendery, including a 7-year-old child, fell ill due to fumes from a gas water heater. They were treated and released in a stable condition. The following night in the capital, Tiraspol, a woman died while showering in a poorly-ventilated apartment where a chimneyless gas water heater was in use, according to the region’s Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Unable to keep classrooms warm, schools and colleges have extended the winter vacation until January 20, far later than scheduled. Many kindergartens have not reopened after the holidays. The ones that have are burning firewood for heating.

Sergey Obolonik, minister for economic development, said Wednesday that the region’s gas reserves will last for another 24 days.

Has Moldova also been hit?

Yes, but not as badly. Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Moldova was almost entirely reliant on Russian gas. But a few months into the war, Russia’s energy giant Gazprom sharply cut gas supplies to the country and hiked its prices, citing unpaid debts.

Moldovan officials were perplexed – and some cried foul, describing the move as an attempt to “blackmail” the country for a pivot towards the West. With winter approaching, Moldova swiftly arranged energy supplies from Europe.

Despite ending gas purchases from Russia, it still bought large amounts of its energy from Transnistria, which uses Russian gas to generate electricity at the Cuciurgan power plant.

Now Russian gas supplies have been cut off, that plant is producing vastly less energy. Moldova has had to buy from emergency European markets – mostly via Romania – at nearly twice the price.

Further costs are on the horizon, too. Moldova’s government in Chisinau, led by the recently re-elected pro-Western President Maia Sandu, has said it will provide support to residents fleeing from the freezing temperatures and energy shortages in Transnistria.

Will Transnistria accept help from Chisinau?

Chisinau has offered to sell gas and energy to Transnistria, although officials in Tiraspol show little sign of accepting the offer.

The main reason is economic. Unlike Moscow, Chisinau is not proposing to send gas for free. After 30 years of abundant, low-cost energy, Transnistrians would now have to pay the same rate as those in Moldova proper.

Another reason is political. After decades of proclaiming its independence from Moldova, to be seen accepting “help” from it would be akin to admitting failure.

Instead, Tiraspol is attempting to pin the crisis on Chisinau. Krasnoselsky has accused Moldova of trying to “strangle” the region and force it to renounce its claims to statehood.

What’s Russia’s role?

Russia could provide gas to Transnistria but is choosing not to. Although it can no longer transit gas through Ukraine, other pipelines are available under the Black Sea via Turkey, albeit at a higher cost than before.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday that the situation is “critical,” but added that “the decisions of Ukraine and the Moldovan authorities” had “deprived” Transnistria of natural gas.

Peskov said some European countries, including Slovakia, still wanted Russia’s “more competitive” supplies. He also criticized the United States for profiting from the crisis, saying it had boosted its costlier gas exports to Europe.

Russia may also stand to gain from declining to end the energy crisis in Transnistria – whose people it claims to support.

Russia has long worked to destabilize Moldova, most recently in its presidential election in October, which was framed as a choice between Moscow and the West.

Although Sandu clung on in October, Moldova has parliamentary elections later this year. The crisis in Transnistria – which could prompt thousands of residents to flee across the border – provides Russia with an opportunity to sow more chaos in Moldova, Popescu warned.

“Russia doesn’t care much about residents in Transnistria. It has the goal of destabilizing the Moldovan economy, political system and social fabric. It doesn’t care about Transnistrians freezing in winter,” he said.

Why did Ukraine not renew the gas transit agreement?

Ukraine was widely expected to let the agreement lapse, sensing an opportunity to inflict costs on Russia and its allies.

After Russian gas stopped flowing through Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky called the move “one of Moscow’s greatest defeats.” He accused the Kremlin of using energy as a “weapon” with which to blackmail its partners.

Although Ukraine now faces a loss of some $800 million a year in transit fees from Russia, Gazprom stands to lose far more, at up to $5 billion a year in sales, according to Reuters.

Russian officials have responded furiously to the move. Russia’s Embassy in Moldova said Kyiv had “cynically” stopped the flow of gas to “condemn the population of Transnistria to suffering.” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova called the decision “bullying and neo-Nazism.”

Pistrinciuc, director of the ISI think tank, said he hoped these narratives did not take hold among Transnistrians. He said the crisis might make some confront what he described as the reality of their situation: “It’s a very isolated region… We hope that they see the impotence of this type of unrecognized state.”