TEHRAN- Mohamed Saad Kamil, Editor-in-Chief of the Brown Land News, focuses on issues of peace, justice, and human rights in Sudan. He is known for his steadfast stance in defending the truth and exposing the violations committed against civilians, especially in conflict areas such as Darfur, including El Fasher. 

Under his leadership, Brown Land has become a free platform that carries the voices of the Sudanese people to the world, emphasizing professional and humanitarian documentation of events away from political propaganda.

In this exclusive interview with the Tehran Times, the prominent Sudanese journalist offers a harrowing account of the ongoing atrocities in Darfur, a region once again plunged into violence. 

He explains how external actors, regional ambitions, and the legacy of ethnic manipulation have reignited the flames of genocide, while shedding light on the silence of the international community and the immense risks faced by Sudanese journalists reporting the truth.

The following is the text of the interview:

As a Sudanese journalist who has closely followed developments in Darfur, how would you describe what is happening there right now? Is this a continuation of the 2003 tragedy, or has the conflict taken a new form?

What is happening in Darfur is a genocide targeting the African ethnic groups, and this genocide represents the first stage of the Arab Janjaweed militia’s plan. The Janjaweed are Arab tribes originating from Central and West Africa, who have united with the aim of establishing a state in the Darfur region through the extermination of the Black population. Unfortunately, these tribes have received support from neighboring countries such as Chad, which is implementing the policies of the United Arab Emirates.

The objectives of the conflict in western Sudan have changed. Previously, under Omar al-Bashir’s government, the goal was to eliminate the rebellion in Darfur through the creation of the Janjaweed militia. At that time, the government maintained some level of control over the Janjaweed, and although serious violations occurred, the situation was somewhat contained.

Today, however, the context is different — there is now foreign support for the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), just as there was foreign support for the rebels in the past against al-Bashir’s government. It is now clear that this external interference targets the unity and stability of Sudan.

The Janjaweed militants rape women, kill children and the elderly, and proudly document these crimes with their cameras. What, in your view, are the root causes behind the renewed violence in Darfur? Are these purely ethnic and tribal tensions, or are there deeper political and economic triggers?

The reasons behind the renewed conflict and violence in Darfur change according to the interests of the countries that sponsor instability in Sudan, such as the United States, which previously supported the rebellion under the guise of humanitarian intervention. Back then, the U.S. and the West supplied weapons to the rebels, claiming it was to stop human rights violations.

Now, however, the same weapons are being sent to their former enemies — the Janjaweed — but this time through the United Arab Emirates, their regional proxy, and with the blessing of Israel.

Ethnic tensions have been exploited to implement this plan. Previously, the marginalization of African ethnic groups was used to fuel the conflict, but it has now become clear that these justifications are merely excuses to execute a larger, premeditated scheme.

How much responsibility do the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) bear for the atrocities taking place? Is either side showing willingness for accountability?

The whole world knows that the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are the ones who rebelled against the Sudanese government and committed atrocities and violations across the entire country. Women were raped, and children and the elderly were killed, while the Janjaweed proudly documented these crimes with their cameras, boasting about their actions.

The Sudanese army has always — and continues to — defend Sudan against invasion and rebellion by gangs and mercenaries. Everyone can testify that the areas under the control of the Sudanese Armed Forces enjoy security and stability, whereas civilians flee from areas controlled by the RSF to seek safety in army-held regions.

Therefore, the full responsibility lies with the Rapid Support Forces militia.

Africa has always faced a deadly silence and Darfur is part of Africa’s tragic story.

Many analysts say Darfur has become a proxy battlefield for regional and global powers. To what extent do you believe foreign interests — from the UAE, Egypt, or even Russia and the U.S. — are influencing the violence?

Indeed, Darfur has become an arena for political showdowns between regional and international powers. It is clear that the conflict between Russia and the United States has extended into Sudan, with the U.S. employing proxies such as the United Arab Emirates and Chad to support the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). On the other hand, Russia stands with the Sudanese government, while the competition over control of ports has further intensified tensions in the region.

Behind the slogans of “maritime security” and “regional stability”, Abu Dhabi conceals an intelligence network linking it to Tel Aviv and Washington, a network that is redrawing maps of control over sea routes and ports from the Bab al-Mandab Strait to the Suez Canal. Thus, the conflict in Darfur is expanding toward the Red Sea, transforming into a colonial-style struggle driven by power, influence, and bloodshed.

How do you assess the reaction of the international community and the United Nations to the killings in Darfur? Why does the global response appear muted compared to 2003?

The reaction of the international community has always been tied to its hostility toward Sudanese governments. In 2003, the international community strongly supported the rebels against the government at that time. Today, that same community supports the new rebellion and the Janjaweed militia through its silence regarding the horrific violations taking place in Sudan.

It is therefore clear that the international community—under the influence of the West, the United States, and Israel—supports any activity that contributes to destabilizing Sudan.

As a media professional, how do you view the silence of major Western outlets on the Darfur crisis today? Has the world grown indifferent to African suffering?

Africa has always faced a deadly silence… and Darfur is part of Africa’s tragic story.

The world’s silence toward what is happening in Darfur and across Africa is a strategic silence, driven by a desire for natural resources. The world views Africa as a storehouse of natural wealth to be exploited later. Therefore, the West fuels and sustains conflict in Africa to ensure that Africans remain unable to extract and benefit from these resources buried beneath their own soil.

What risks do Sudanese journalists face when covering crimes by powerful armed factions? Have you or your colleagues experienced intimidation or censorship?

Journalists are facing threats and harassment from the militia. During the war, more than 40 journalists were killed, and many others were kidnapped by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) — the most recent being Al Jazeera’s correspondent in the city of El Fasher.

In addition, journalists have lost all sources of income after the suspension of all Sudanese newspapers, with some outlets shifting to online platforms that cannot accommodate the large number of journalists in Sudan.