Face of Truth: The Al-Salha Massacre: Unveiling International Failure

Ibrahim Shglawi

The Al-Salha massacre, south of Omdurman, marked a pivotal point in the record of grave violations that have ravaged Sudan amidst the escalation of armed conflict. The massacre embodied the transition of Rapid Support Forces (RSF) crimes from horizontal expansion to what one expert termed “vertical qualitative savagery.” In a scene that shakes human conscience, RSF militias executed 31 young men by firing squad in a public square, in cold blood and before the eyes of the local residents — a blatant violation of international humanitarian law, amounting to a war crime and a crime against humanity.

According to eyewitness accounts and preliminary reports in Sudanese media, RSF elements stormed a public square in Al-Salha early on the day of the massacre and opened fire on a number of civilian captives. With the Sudanese Doctors’ Union reporting the death toll rising to 31 martyrs, the echoes of this atrocity spread wide, exposing the vast gap between the texts of international law and their implementation in Sudan.

Previously, the RSF had pledged to treat captives according to the laws of war. However, documented evidence in audio and video proved that these promises remained mere propaganda, demonstrating a systematic approach to human rights violations. Field commanders affiliated with the RSF were seen recounting the details of the massacre, confirming their perpetration of this atrocity.

Politically, several civil and national forces — including the Sudanese Congress Party (in a rare precedent), the Democratic Unionist Party (Original), the Future Movement for Reform and Development, and the Umma Party for Reform and Renewal — condemned this heinous crime. They held the RSF fully responsible and called on the international community to act swiftly, form independent investigation committees, and hold accountable all parties that continue to supply the RSF with weapons and equipment.

In parallel, the National Sufi Authority issued a strong statement backed by visual evidence and confessions from within RSF ranks, further substantiating the accusations of deliberate and systematic war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Militarily, the massacre coincided with the Sudanese army’s advance in western Omdurman, its capture of the “Kunan” camp, and its push toward the Al-Salha camp — suggesting that the RSF resorted to executing captives and civilians to prevent their falling alive into army hands, which could have exposed even more atrocities.

The Al-Salha massacre is not just an isolated violation; it rings alarm bells for Sudan’s future. Such massacres and the broadcast of public executions contribute to the disintegration of the social fabric and spread psychological defeat among civilians. Amid a suspicious international silence, a pressing moral question looms: What value does the international legal system hold if massacres of this magnitude pass without punishment or deterrence? If the RSF is not designated as a terrorist organization after such documented savagery, then by what standard is terrorism defined?

Ignoring these crimes constitutes a stab at the credibility of the international system and deepens Sudan’s tragedy. Sudan today fights two battles: the battle for survival against militias of death, and the battle to reclaim dignity and justice, which never expire with time. The blood of the Al-Salha martyrs — along with the victims of Darfur, Sennar, and Al-Jazira — stands as eternal testimony to the magnitude of the tragedy and a living flame in the struggle for freedom and dignity, whose fire will not die out until all the land is liberated from the filth of the militias and their local and regional supporters, and until a state of justice and peace is established.

Amidst the spilled blood and the rubble of devastated cities, the world seems to be facing one of its harshest moral tests. It is fully aware — based on evidence documented by numerous international and regional rights organizations — of the regional support fueling this war. When homes, schools, and hospitals are deliberately targeted, human dignity is assassinated, and the war itself becomes a crime. Remaining silent thus becomes a moral downfall and a betrayal unworthy of a living conscience and true humanity.

Here, the importance of international humanitarian law emerges. Protecting civilians and captives during conflicts is a legal obligation that cannot be compromised. The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977 emphasize the protection of civilians and prisoners during armed conflicts. Heinous acts such as the deliberate killing of captives or civilians are classified as war crimes and crimes against humanity. According to these standards, perpetrators are liable to prosecution before the International Criminal Court (ICC), under the Rome Statute of 1998.

From the face of truth, we recall Hegel’s words: “Freedom is realized only through law.” The absence of commitment to laws does not merely constitute a breach; it represents the destruction of freedom itself and the dismantling of human values. Hegel further clarifies that freedom is not found in chaos but in the order that guarantees rights and justice.
In this context, we hope that Sudanese judicial institutions will continue their earnest efforts to establish the rights of victims and achieve justice for them by applying local and international laws that guarantee the protection of human rights. This would be a crucial step toward restoring security and peace in Sudan and strengthening its national sovereignty based on justice and human dignity.

Wishing you wellness and peace.
Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com