REPORT: Sudan's army retakes Kurmuk after four months of RSF terror

Introduction: A border town handed back to Khartoum, at what price

Kurmuk, strategic gateway on the Blue Nile

On July 8, 2026, Sudan's army announced it had retaken control of Kurmuk, a strategic border town in Blue Nile State in southeastern Sudan. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) claimed the recapture after intense fighting that inflicted heavy human and material losses on the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Kurmuk had been seized in March 2026 by a coalition of the RSF and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a faction led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu. The town sits on the border with Ethiopia and overlooks the approaches to the Al-Roseires Dam, a hydroelectric facility vital to the country.

According to Anadolu, military sources confirmed that government forces and allied units entered Kurmuk after a series of operations against RSF and SPLM-N fighters. The agency reports that the advance follows recent army gains in Blue Nile State, where it had already retaken several areas near the borders with Ethiopia and South Sudan. The RSF's capture of Kurmuk in March had displaced more than 73,000 people, according to data compiled in the timeline of Sudan's civil war. This back-and-forth battle illustrates the erratic, destructive nature of a conflict that has dragged on since April 2023.

Celebration in Damazin, war propaganda in plain sight

In Damazin, the capital of Blue Nile State, thousands of residents celebrated in the streets at news of Kurmuk's recapture, according to an Anadolu correspondent cited by the Middle East Monitor. The state governor, Ahmed Al-Omda, and the commander of the 4th Infantry Division, General Ismail Al-Tayeb, drove through the city in a convertible to cheering crowds. Al-Omda called the recapture of Kurmuk a "major victory" and congratulated the Sudanese Armed Forces. Kurmuk's governor, Abdel Ati Mohamed Al-Faki, announced the formation of committees to rehabilitate infrastructure and allow displaced residents to return.

These scenes of jubilation should not obscure a darker reality: Sudan's civil war has already displaced millions and continues to ravage several regions at once. The recapture of Kurmuk is a genuine tactical success for the army, but it comes in a country where fighting continues in Kordofan, Darfur, and elsewhere. The RSF has, at this stage, made no public comment on losing the town, according to several news agencies, leaving open the question of how durable this military reversal really is.

There is something deeply uncomfortable about images of public celebration while a civil war keeps emptying out entire villages elsewhere in the country. Part of me wants to celebrate along with Damazin. I hold back, because the next town could fall next week, and this cycle has run for more than three years without any Western capital truly losing sleep over it.

A battle that took more than three months to turn

From March's fall to July's reconquest

Kurmuk's reversal did not happen overnight. According to the timeline detailed by the Council on Foreign Relations, the RSF and SPLM-N first seized the towns of Deim Mansour, Bashir Nuqu, and Khor al-Budi near Kurmuk, before capturing the town itself on March 24, 2026. An RSF spokesman claimed at the time to have "fully liberated" Kurmuk after fierce fighting — language that already inverts the reality of a paramilitary offensive against the internationally recognized Sudanese state.

In the months that followed, Sudan's army methodically rebuilt its position. According to Al Jazeera, it had already retaken the nearby town of Khor Hassan in mid-May, a step deemed necessary before it could target Kurmuk itself. A military source cited by the pan-African outlet Addis Standard described a pincer maneuver, with government troops advancing from the north and south to encircle fighters entrenched in the town. This slow but steady progress contrasts with the image of a totally fragmented Sudan that territorial control maps sometimes convey.

Ethiopia's ambiguous role next door

Kurmuk's proximity to the Ethiopian border is no minor geographic detail. Al Jazeera reported as early as May that the region's reconquest raised fears of a spillover into Ethiopia, a country that has itself weathered major internal tensions in recent years. Correspondent Hiba Morgan described Kurmuk as a "garrison town" that the RSF used to extend its territorial reach beyond the conflict's traditional focus on Khartoum and Darfur.

This regional dimension is a reminder that Sudan's civil war is not an isolated conflict. It sits within a broader instability across the Horn of Africa, where rivalries among regional and outside powers — the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and others — indirectly fuel the belligerents' capabilities. None of these regional dynamics makes rapid de-escalation any easier, and the recapture of Kurmuk, even if it temporarily eases local pressure, resolves none of the conflict's structural causes.

We often talk about Ukraine and Gaza as conflicts that dominate global attention, and rightly so. But Sudan deserves more than a passing mention. A civil war that is redrawing regional borders and threatens to spill into Ethiopia should worry far more Western foreign ministries than it currently does.

The Rapid Support Forces, a militia that became a parallel state

Origins of a sprawling paramilitary force

The Rapid Support Forces are not a simple, improvised militia. Descendants of the Janjaweed, these paramilitary forces were gradually folded into Sudan's security apparatus before turning against the regular army in April 2023, triggering the current civil war. Led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as "Hemedti," the RSF controls entire swaths of Sudanese territory, particularly in the Darfur region, where international organizations have documented systematic atrocities against civilians.

The battle for Kurmuk illustrates the RSF's strategy: seeking opportunistic local alliances — here with al-Hilu's SPLM-N — to extend control toward strategic border areas offering supply routes and resources. This approach has allowed the RSF to hold territory disproportionate to its actual popular base, relying on superior firepower and outside backing that several international analyses have pointed to without always being able to prove it formally before a court.

A regular army retaking the initiative, but at what human cost

The recapture of Kurmuk is part of a string of territorial gains by Sudan's army in recent months. According to the CFR timeline, government forces and allied Darfur militias have also retaken Jebel Moon, 70 kilometers from Geneina, a sign of military momentum that appears, at least temporarily, to favor Khartoum on several fronts simultaneously. But every reconquest comes with its own toll of destruction and displacement, in a country where humanitarian aid already struggles to get through.

The same timeline reports that a drone strike near Tandalti hit a humanitarian truck bound for South Kordofan, destroying 50 tons of aid meant for starving civilians. This episode, separate from the Kurmuk battle but occurring within the same window of the conflict, is a reminder that military gains by either side do not automatically translate into better conditions for civilians caught between two fires.

Beware the reflex to applaud every territorial reconquest as a clean win for good over evil. Sudan's army carries its own share of responsibility for this war's abuses. What is certain, though, is that the Rapid Support Forces built their power on terror, and every town they lose is a town where civilians stop living, at least for a while, under that terror.

A conflict that spills far beyond Sudan's borders

The regional rivalry feeding the war

Sudan's conflict cannot be understood without its international dimensions. Several specialized organizations have documented flows of weapons and financial support to the various factions involved, implicating actors from the Gulf and beyond. This de facto internationalization turns Sudan into a theater where rivalries far larger than its national borders play out, much like other conflict zones where outside powers fund proxies rather than intervene directly.

This dynamic points to a rule too often overlooked in analyses of contemporary African conflicts: the absence of a directly engaged Western power does not mean the absence of major strategic stakes. Sudan, by virtue of its position on the Red Sea and its resources, draws the interest of powers well beyond the African continent, and the outcome of this civil war will carry geopolitical repercussions that extend far beyond Khartoum and Kurmuk.

Western diplomacy's relative silence

Unlike Ukraine, where every strike and every advance receives intense diplomatic and media tracking in the West, Sudan remains largely absent from the stated priorities of major Western powers. This asymmetry of attention does not reflect an objective hierarchy of human suffering, but rather geopolitical priorities that place Europe and the Euro-Atlantic space at the center of Western strategic concerns.

That should not stand in the way of heightened vigilance. A Sudan that collapses further, or that falls durably under the influence of powers hostile to Western interests, would represent a major regional security risk, particularly for the stability of the Red Sea, a vital maritime corridor for global trade. The relative indifference toward this conflict carries a strategic cost that the West underestimates.

Some will say the West cannot handle every conflict in the world at once. True. But there is a difference between being unable to intervene militarily and failing to even sustain constant diplomatic pressure. Sudan deserves better than the occasional silence it gets between more heavily covered crises.

The military lessons of a methodical reconquest

A strategy of gradual reconquest rather than frontal assault

The sequence of events around Kurmuk reveals a relatively disciplined military approach by the Sudanese Armed Forces: securing outlying towns before targeting the strategic center of gravity. This method, documented by several sources including Addis Standard, gradually eroded the defensive capacity of the RSF and SPLM-N without exposing the army to catastrophic losses in a hasty frontal assault.

This approach contrasts with the often-repeated image of a Sudanese army in perpetual retreat against better-equipped, more mobile paramilitary forces. The recapture of Kurmuk, if it holds, suggests the regular army has managed, at least locally, to regain coherent operational capacity — a factor that could shift the balance of power in other theaters of Sudan's conflict in the months ahead.

The question of how durable these territorial gains are

This civil war's recent history has repeatedly shown that territorial gains can reverse quickly. Kurmuk itself was under government control before falling in March, proof that control of a border town in this region remains highly reversible. The question, then, is not just who controls Kurmuk today, but whether Sudan's army has the human and logistical resources to hold this position durably against RSF attempts to retake it.

Statements from local authorities about rebuilding infrastructure and the return of displaced populations suggest a desire to quickly consolidate this gain, but reconstruction in an active war zone remains a risky bet. Without a guarantee of lasting security, the 73,000 people displaced when the town fell in March may hesitate a long time before going home.

Every time a town changes hands in this war, we hear the same promises of rehabilitation and return to normal. The real test is never the reconquest itself, but what happens six months later, once the cameras have left and the question becomes: did the residents actually go home, or does the town remain a militarized no man's land?

Blue Nile, a forgotten region in a war that is no less forgotten

An underrated strategic geography

Blue Nile State occupies a pivotal position in the geography of Sudan's conflict, sitting at the crossroads of influences coming from Darfur in the west and regional dynamics tied to Ethiopia in the east. Control of this region shapes access to cross-border trade routes and essential energy infrastructure, notably the Al-Roseires Dam, which supplies a significant share of Sudan's electricity needs.

This strategic importance explains why both sides poured considerable resources into the battle for Kurmuk rather than letting it go as a mere peripheral town. The region nonetheless remains largely absent from international media coverage, overshadowed by more emblematic fighting in Khartoum or Darfur, even though its fate could determine the country's energy and economic trajectory for years to come.

What the battle reveals about the real state of the forces involved

Beyond the symbolism, the recapture of Kurmuk offers tangible clues about the shifting balance of power between Sudan's army and the RSF-SPLM-N coalition. The fact that the RSF did not immediately dispute its defeat publicly, unlike its usual habit of quickly claiming victories and positions, could signal losses heavier than what their statements usually admit.

This absence of an official response, documented by several agencies including Xinhua, leaves open the question of how solid this reconquest will prove going forward. An army that does not comment on its defeat may already be preparing its response — a pattern this war has already shown repeatedly since 2023, where every town retaken by one side quickly becomes the target of the other's counteroffensive.

The Rapid Support Forces' silence after this defeat worries me almost more than a defiant statement would. In this war, silence has never been a sign of resignation. It is usually the calm before the next offensive.

Kurmuk's civilians, invisible hostages of a war of position

A population caught in a vise since March

Behind the military statements and the celebrations in Damazin lies the reality of thousands of civilians who lived under RSF and SPLM-N control for nearly four months, and who now face the uncertainty of returning to a town devastated by fighting. Many of the 73,000 people displaced when Kurmuk fell in March have no guarantee they can go home anytime soon, so long as security in the area is not fully restored.

Humanitarian organizations on the ground in Sudan regularly warn about catastrophic living conditions in displacement zones, where access to clean water, healthcare, and food remains precarious. A military recapture does nothing to resolve these immediate humanitarian emergencies — at best, it only opens a window of opportunity for an eventual return, provided basic infrastructure is quickly restored.

A war that keeps ignoring calls for a truce

Despite several attempts at international mediation, notably under the auspices of regional powers and the African Union, no lasting ceasefire has ever held since the conflict began in 2023. The battle for Kurmuk adds to a long list of military episodes proving that both sides, at this stage, still favor a solution by force over the negotiating table.

This persistent diplomatic impasse should alarm the international community more, at a time when other major humanitarian crises — Gaza, Ukraine — absorb most of the available attention and diplomatic resources. Sudan risks becoming a forgotten conflict precisely at the moment it is producing some of its most significant military developments since the war began.

People often ask why Sudan doesn't mobilize more of Western public opinion. I don't have a simple answer. What I do know is that Kurmuk's civilians chose neither the RSF, nor Sudan's army, nor the international indifference surrounding them. They endure all three at once.

International responsibility for a conflict that keeps dragging on

The expected, and often missing, role of multilateral institutions

The United Nations and the African Union have repeatedly called for a lasting ceasefire in Sudan since the conflict broke out in April 2023. So far, these calls have had little concrete effect on the ground. The UN Security Council remains divided on the Sudanese question, with some permanent members maintaining economic and diplomatic ties to regional actors suspected of backing one side or the other, paralyzing any strong binding resolution.

This institutional paralysis echoes a pattern already seen in other contemporary conflicts: when major powers have diverging interests on an issue, the multilateral mechanisms meant to protect civilians lose much of their effectiveness. Sudan illustrates this dynamic in a particularly stark way, with millions of civilians paying the price of geopolitical calculations far beyond their control.

What the West could do, and still isn't doing fully

Targeted sanctions against those responsible for documented abuses, stronger humanitarian support, and sustained diplomatic pressure on the belligerents' regional backers are among the levers Western nations and international organizations could apply more firmly. Some of these levers have been partly used, but in a manner deemed insufficient by several humanitarian organizations active on the ground in Sudan.

A more assertive Western engagement on the Sudanese file is not simply a moral obligation — it is also a matter of regional stability directly tied to Red Sea security and the fight against the growing influence of powers hostile to Western interests in the region. Ignoring this strategic dimension would be a miscalculation whose consequences would be felt well beyond Sudan's borders.

I don't claim to have a magic solution for Sudan. What I can say is that strategic indifference has a price, and that price will be paid one day, probably when least expected, in the form of a migration crisis, a security vacuum, or consolidated hostile influence in a region that should never be neglected.

Conclusion: A fragile victory in a war with no end in sight

What Kurmuk changes, and what it doesn't

The recapture of Kurmuk by Sudan's army is a genuine tactical success and an important symbolic victory for Khartoum, after four months of occupation by an RSF-SPLM-N coalition. It shows the regular army's ability to regain the initiative on at least one front of the conflict, after months in which the dominant media narrative described a continuous advance by paramilitary forces instead. But this local victory changes nothing about the structural balance of a civil war that continues to ravage Darfur, Kordofan, and other regions of the country at the same time.

The question of how durable this gain will be remains wide open. The Rapid Support Forces have yet to respond publicly, a silence that could precede an attempt at reconquest rather than an acceptance of defeat. Until a comprehensive political solution is negotiated between the belligerents, every retaken town will remain vulnerable to a reversal, as Kurmuk's own history has already shown since March.

A test for international attention

Beyond Kurmuk's military fate, this episode should serve as a reminder: Sudan is living through one of the most severe humanitarian crises in the world, with millions displaced and documented atrocities against civilians, particularly in Darfur. The international community, including Western powers, cannot afford to treat this conflict as a footnote in global news, at the risk of letting a strategic region of the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea sink durably into chaos.

The reconquest of Kurmuk is not the end of Sudan's war. At best, it is one chapter — and the next one is already being written, somewhere between the RSF's silence and the uncertainty of the 73,000 displaced people waiting to find out if they can go home.

I don't know whether Kurmuk will still be Sudanese six months from now. No one really knows in this war of shifting lines. What I do know is that every recaptured town gives back, even briefly, a bit of dignity to populations the world has too often chosen to forget.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Editorial stance

This report takes an editorial line favorable to the international order grounded in law, and critical of actors who resort to armed violence against civilians, including Sudan's Rapid Support Forces. This stance implies no leniency toward Sudan's army, whose own responsibilities in this conflict are not glossed over. The goal is to inform on a conflict too often neglected by Western media attention, consistent with a view that places the protection of civilians and regional stability at the center of the analysis.

Methodology and sources

Every fact, figure, and statement cited in this article comes from verified, attributed sources: the Council on Foreign Relations (Global Conflict Tracker), Anadolu Ajansı, Al Jazeera, the Middle East Monitor, Addis Standard, and Xinhua. No fact, quote, or figure has been invented or extrapolated beyond what these sources report. Uncertainties about the RSF's response and the durability of the reconquest are explicitly flagged as such in the text.

Nature of this analysis

This text is a report that seeks to place a specific military development within the broader context of Sudan's civil war. The italicized editorial passages, clearly marked, express the columnist's personal viewpoint and are distinct from the reported facts. Maxime Marquette (MadMax) maintains an engaged line in favor of civilian protection and international attention toward under-covered African conflicts, without claiming absolute neutrality.

Sources

Primary sources

Council on Foreign Relations — Global Conflict Tracker, Sudan's civil war, July 8, 2026 entry

Sudanese army enters strategic eastern town of Al-Kurmuk after battles with RSF — Anadolu Ajansı, July 8, 2026

Sudan: crowds celebrate in Damazin after army retakes Kurmuk — Middle East Monitor, July 9, 2026

Secondary sources

Sudanese army captures key town near Ethiopian border from RSF — Al Jazeera, May 16, 2026

Sudanese army "retakes" strategic town of Al-Kurmuk after battles with RSF — TRT Afrika, July 8, 2026

Sudanese armed forces announce recapture of strategic town of Kurmuk — Xinhua, July 9, 2026