Northeast Africa · SAF (Sudan Armed Forces) vs RSF (Rapid Support Forces)
As of mid-2026, the Sudan Civil War continues with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) locked in a stalemate, primarily centered around Khartoum, Darfur, and Kordofan.
The RSF, led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo "Hemedti," has consolidated control over much of Darfur, leveraging their superior mobility and local support. Their center of gravity is their ability to control key supply routes and conduct rapid, asymmetric raids.
The SAF, under General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, maintains firm control over Khartoum and key strategic locations, including the Port of Port Sudan. Their center of gravity is their heavy artillery and air superiority, which they use to hold the RSF at bay in urban areas.
The most likely course of action (MLCOA) is a prolonged stalemate, with both sides unable to gain significant ground. The RSF will likely continue to harass SAF positions and control rural areas, while the SAF will maintain urban strongholds and conduct airstrikes to prevent RSF advances.
A key indicator to watch is the status of the oil fields in the south, particularly the Heglig and Unity fields. Control over these fields will significantly impact the economic and military capabilities of both sides.
[Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)] COG: Control of strategic cities and infrastructure. Critical Capabilities: Air power and mechanized units. Critical Requirements: Fuel, ammunition, and operational bases. Critical Vulnerabilities: Supply lines, foreign support, and public perception.
[Rapid Support Forces (RSF)] COG: Mobility and rapid deployment. Critical Capabilities: Light infantry and guerrilla tactics. Critical Requirements: Funding, weaponry, and intelligence networks. Critical Vulnerabilities: Logistics, international pressure, and internal cohesion.
The SAF relies on conventional warfare, with air power and mechanized units as key strengths. Their control of strategic areas depends on maintaining supply lines and operational bases, while facing challenges from public perception and potential loss of foreign support. The RSF leverages mobility and guerrilla tactics, requiring funding, weapons, and intelligence to sustain their campaigns. Their vulnerabilities include logistical challenges, international pressure, and ensuring internal cohesion.
Most Likely Course of Action (MLCOA): The conflict will remain a stalemate, with both sides maintaining control over their current territories. Watch for increased foreign intervention and a potential humanitarian crisis.
Most Dangerous Course of Action (MDCOA): One side may gain a strategic advantage, leading to a rapid collapse of the other. Monitor key cities and supply lines for signs of a decisive shift.
Confidence Level: Moderate. The high number of variables, including external influences and internal faction dynamics, make precise predictions challenging.
Will Sudan RSF control Khartoum by end of 2026?
Intelligence updated daily by AI analysis · Methodology · Subscribe