Sudan Witness Project Report on Airstrikes\n\nA report by the Sudan Witness Project details at least 1,700 civilian fatalities resulting from Sudanese Air Force (SAF) bombings. These attacks reportedly targeted residential neighborhoods, markets, schools, and camps for displaced persons since the conflict began in April 2023.\n\nThe Sudan Witness Project, an initiative of the Center for Information Resilience (CIR), states it has compiled the largest known dataset of military airstrikes in the ongoing conflict. Its analysis indicates the SAF has used unguided bombs in populated areas. The data specifically focuses on attacks by warplanes, which are operated exclusively by the SAF. The Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the SAF's rival, employs drone strikes, which were excluded from this particular research.\n\nThe RSF has faced international condemnation, including accusations of ethnic massacres in Sudan's western Darfur region and charges of genocide by the United States. While acknowledging RSF actions, Mark Snoeck, who directed the Sudan Witness Project, stated that the SAF should also be held accountable for its actions. The SAF has received international criticism, with accusations of indiscriminate bombings. The SAF has previously denied targeting civilians, stating its airstrikes are "directed solely at RSF gatherings, locations and bases recognized as legitimate military targets." The British foreign ministry provided funding for this project.\n\n### Documented Incidents and Findings\n\nAccording to an advance copy of the report, Sudan Witness analyzed 384 airstrikes conducted between April 2023 and July 2025. This analysis documented over 1,700 civilian deaths and 1,120 injuries. The project notes these figures are conservative, based on the lowest reported numbers.\n\nThe documented incidents include:\n* 135 cases involving residential areas, with verified destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure.\n* 35 instances where bombs struck markets and commercial facilities, often when crowded.\n* 19 strikes affecting vulnerable populations in health facilities, displaced persons' sites, and educational institutions.\n\nSudan Witness acknowledges limitations in its research, including challenges in obtaining comprehensive data from conflict zones due to telecommunications issues and difficulties in identifying credible sources. The project also noted that strikes on military targets are likely underreported. Through a rigorous methodology, the project aimed to provide a broader overview of the military's air campaigns, visualizing the information on an interactive map.\n\nMr. Snoeck highlighted recurring patterns of strikes on residential neighborhoods, markets, and humanitarian/medical facilities, suggesting that the SAF may not be taking sufficient measures to avoid civilian casualties. Justin Lynch, managing director at Conflict Insights Group, commented that Sudanese civilians are bearing the brunt of the conflict, with air power and other heavy weapons reportedly targeting civilian sites more frequently than military ones.\n\n### Verification and Specific Cases\n\nThe credibility of reported airstrikes was assessed by Sudan Witness using publicly available digital information (open-source intelligence). This involved evaluating source reliability, analyzing social media videos for location verification, and utilizing satellite imagery. While some incidents were based solely on reports, corroborating evidence allowed confirmation of attacks with a low-to-medium degree of certainty in other cases. The report highlights instances where munitions, impact craters, or shrapnel damage were identified.\n\nOne documented instance involved multiple videos and images confirming a crater with an undetonated air-dropped bomb in the Zamzam camp for displaced people in North Darfur. This munition reportedly matched an SH-250 unguided bomb produced by Military Industry Corporation, a Sudanese arms manufacturer. The report noted that the area was not under RSF control at the time of the strike.\n\nAnother verified video captured the moment of impact during a bombing of the Hamrat al-Sheikh Market in North Kordofan state, resulting in reports of at least 30 fatalities and 100 injuries.\n\nMany air attacks attributed to the SAF have occurred in Darfur, an RSF-controlled region. These include an August 2024 strike on a hospital in el-Daein, the historic capital of the Rizeigat people, to whom the majority of RSF forces belong. Footage verified by Sudan Witness showed shrapnel damage to the building. The World Health Organisation (WHO) and UN children's charity Unicef reported 16 civilian deaths, including three children and one healthcare worker, in this incident. A spokesman for the Justice and Equality Movement, an army-allied rebel group, criticized this strike for targeting hospitals and homes.\n\nNyala, in South Darfur state, is frequently targeted. Its airport is alleged to be a primary entry point for RSF weapons, including sophisticated drones, reportedly delivered by the United Arab Emirates, which Abu Dhabi denies. The SAF states its targets in the city are military supplies. However, the Sudan War Monitor, a group tracking the conflict, suggests the SAF lacks precision weapons for accurate targeting in densely populated areas. A series of SAF airstrikes in Nyala city center in February, also documented by Human Rights Watch, reportedly struck residential neighborhoods and a grocery store near an eye hospital, killing at least 63 people. The report indicates that strikes on busy marketplaces and commercial hubs cause civilian casualties and disrupt economic stability. In October 2023, at least 65 people were reportedly killed and 200 injured in a bombing that destroyed the al-Kuma market in North Darfur. Sudan Witness verified the location through footage and satellite imagery.\n\nAn official, quoted by Dabanga, an independent Sudanese broadcaster, stated that an army cannot bomb its own people under the pretext of protection. A British foreign office official commented on the disregard for civilian safety and emphasized the need for accountability for perpetrators of such actions.\n\n### Evolving Conflict Dynamics\n\nThe Sudan Witness Project continues to monitor air raids beyond July 2025 and has observed a recent shift towards drone strikes by both parties. The Sudan War Monitor has highlighted alleged SAF drone attacks targeting groups perceived as supporting the opposing side, such as an October drone attack on al-Kuma, reportedly hitting a social gathering at the home of a local religious leader. Al-Kuma is primarily inhabited by the Ziyadiya, an Arab nomadic group associated with the RSF.\n\nIn the same period, the RSF launched drone and artillery attacks on el-Fasher, striking a religious displacement center and reportedly killing at least 60 civilians. El-Fasher is predominantly inhabited by non-Arab groups, such as the Zaghawa, associated with armed groups defending the city against the RSF.\n\nJustin Lynch of Conflict Insights Group stated that neither side primarily uses drones or airpower to target military locations, suggesting their use is either indiscriminate or intended to terrorize civilian populations, which he characterized as war crimes.\n\nThe SAF maintains that the RSF seeks refuge within residential neighborhoods and asserts its adherence to international humanitarian laws and rules of engagement, including the protection of civilians and their properties. Both the SAF and RSF have faced accusations of committing war crimes. This week, the RSF and its ally the Sudan Liberation Movement-North were accused of drone strikes on a kindergarten and a hospital in Kalogi, South Kordofan, with the WHO reporting 114 fatalities, including 63 children.\n\nMr. Lynch noted that despite significant civilian suffering, neither side has achieved substantial military success through air warfare, with the exception of SAF's aerial operations supporting the takeover of Khartoum. He stated that RSF drone use, reportedly backed by foreign mercenaries and the UAE, has also yielded limited strategic results.\n\nThe full Sudan Witness report is scheduled for publication on December 10.