UK condemns RSF in El Fasher and demands aid access

If you’re following Sudan, here’s what changed today. On 27 October 2025, UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper set out Britain’s position on the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) pushing further into El Fasher, North Darfur. The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office describes a grave threat to civilians and calls for safe routes out of the city and immediate access for life‑saving aid.

To keep the players straight: the RSF is a Sudanese paramilitary group that grew out of militia networks in Darfur. The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) are the national army. Both have publicly said they will protect civilians and allow humanitarian access. The UK response says those words now need to become clear orders to fighters on the ground, and that RSF leaders will be held responsible for what their forces do.

Quick explainer you can use in class: international humanitarian law (IHL) is the set of rules that limits the effects of war. It protects people who are not taking part in the fighting and restricts the weapons and tactics that can be used. These rules sit in the Geneva Conventions and bind both states and armed groups, as the International Committee of the Red Cross explains.

Another key reference point is UN Security Council Resolution 2736, adopted in June 2024. It demands protection for civilians and health care, safe movement in and out of El Fasher, and rapid, unhindered humanitarian access. The UK drafted that text, which passed with broad support, and today’s statement re‑states those obligations plainly.

So what is the UK asking for right now? Commanders from the RSF and SAF must issue and enforce orders to protect civilians, stop attacks on aid workers and hospitals, and allow safe, rapid and unimpeded access for relief operations. The statement also warns that RSF leadership will be held to account for the actions of their fighters.

Britain also sets out what it is funding. According to the FCDO, total UK support for Sudan now stands at more than £120 million. That includes support channelled through organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Sudan Humanitarian Fund, plus an additional £5 million for the Sudan Cash Consortium, with around two‑thirds of this support aimed at the most vulnerable in North Darfur.

What this should look like on the ground matters for your media‑literacy checklist. Safe exits mean clearly announced routes that civilians can use without being attacked. Unimpeded access means convoys allowed to cross lines, crossing points opened, and staff protected. Protecting hospitals means no strikes, no occupation of clinics, and no interference with ambulances or medical stores.

Why the UK’s stance matters for readers in and beyond Britain. The UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and helped drive Resolution 2736. Its public position and aid spending add diplomatic pressure on RSF and SAF leaders and signal to regional groupings-often referred to as the Quad-that coordinated action and compliance with IHL are expected.

Ministers also link progress in Sudan to debates at home on security and irregular migration. For our purposes, the test is simple: do any ceasefire steps hold, can people leave safely, and does aid actually get in. If you’re studying this topic, watch updates from the UN and the ICRC for concrete signs that access and protection are improving.

A final note for classrooms and youth settings. This piece mentions sexual violence because survivors’ safety and justice are central to credible responses. Keep discussion trauma‑aware, avoid graphic detail, and signpost support in your institution so students have space to process difficult material.