Neither the Sudanese military, nor the RSF take any acknowledgement of human life in this war

The Amiet market is a civilian trading area in Abyei, a territory disputed by Sudan and South Sudan. On Monday, a drone strike hit the market and reportedly used multiple munitions. The attack matters because markets are places where civilians gather for food, work, and transport.

Authorities in Abyei district said the Sudanese army carried out the strike. A local official told AFP on Wednesday that the reported death toll had reached 153. The source does not provide independent confirmation of responsibility, but it records the accusation by local authorities.

The attack shows how Sudan’s war can reach crowded civilian spaces. Jan Pospisil, a Sudan Affairs Analyst, said the incident challenged the Sudanese army’s effort to present itself as humane while portraying the RSF as responsible for atrocities. He argued that the episode showed little difference between the two sides’ treatment of civilians.

Abyei is a contested border territory between Sudan and South Sudan. It has its own administrative importance and valuable oil resources, while communities with different ties to both countries live in and around it. The source gives only the basic fact that Abyei is disputed; this broader context comes from established background knowledge.

The dispute grew from disagreements over borders, citizenship, local identity, and control of resources. A planned referendum on whether Abyei should join Sudan or South Sudan was never held. That left the territory’s final status unresolved and made it vulnerable to military and political pressure.

The Amiet market attack shows why the dispute matters beyond maps and diplomacy. Fighting in Abyei can endanger traders and families who are not combatants. It can also deepen tensions between Sudan and South Sudan, complicate relief work, and make a negotiated settlement more difficult.

The reported death toll from Monday’s drone strike rose to 153 by Wednesday. That figure was provided by a local official to AFP. It represents people killed at the Amiet market in Abyei, an area disputed between Sudan and South Sudan.

The official warned that the true toll was likely even higher. In a fresh attack, bodies may remain unidentified, some victims may be missing, and injured people may die later. Damage to records and difficulty reaching the site can also delay reliable counting. The source does not specify which of these factors applied here.

A rising or uncertain death toll matters because it signals the scale of the attack and the difficulty of documenting harm during war. It also affects families seeking information and aid agencies planning a response. Further verification would be needed to establish the final number and responsibility.

The Sudanese Armed Forces, or SAF, are Sudan’s national military. The Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, are a large paramilitary organization. Both became central power holders after Sudan’s 2019 political transition and later fought for control of the state. This wider background is established knowledge, not detail supplied in the source.

The war erupted in April 2023 after disputes over power and plans to integrate the RSF into the regular army. The SAF is associated with General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, while the RSF is led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, widely known as Hemedti. Both forces have been accused of serious abuses.

In the supplied article, local authorities accuse the Sudanese army of the Amiet strike. Analyst Jan Pospisil also says the army portrays itself as humane while blaming the RSF for atrocities. His conclusion is stark: civilians may face little meaningful protection from either side.

Fighting in populated areas turns ordinary civilian spaces into danger zones. Markets, homes, schools, and clinics may be struck or caught in crossfire. People can be killed or injured, while survivors may flee without food, shelter, documents, or income. The Amiet market strike, with 153 reported deaths, illustrates this human cost.

Markets are also part of the survival system. They provide food, jobs, transport, and access to medicines. When violence closes them or destroys stock, prices can rise and shortages can spread. Aid groups may then struggle to reach people because roads are blocked, security worsens, and staff cannot safely travel.

The source does not detail the humanitarian response after the strike. It does show why civilian protection matters. As attacks spread, communities need safe access to essentials, credible investigations, and practical guarantees that relief workers and civilians will not be targeted.

The SAF and RSF were once partners in Sudan’s power structure, but their alliance was unstable. The RSF grew from the Janjaweed forces active in Darfur and became a powerful independent military actor. After President Omar al-Bashir was removed in 2019, both forces shared power with civilians, then helped overthrow the transitional government in 2021.

The central dispute was who would control Sudan’s security system. A proposed transition to civilian rule required the RSF to merge into the regular army. Leaders disagreed over the timetable, command structure, and political future. Fighting broke out in Khartoum in April 2023 and quickly spread across the country.

This history explains the rivalry behind the current war, though it is not provided in the source article. The article focuses on the Amiet strike and the competing narratives around abuses. Continued fighting leaves civilians exposed and makes a political settlement harder to achieve.

International humanitarian law protects civilians during war through several core rules. Parties must distinguish military targets from civilians and civilian objects. They must not deliberately attack civilians, launch indiscriminate attacks, or cause civilian harm that is excessive compared with the expected military advantage. They must also take feasible precautions.

A market is ordinarily a civilian object. It could lose that protection only if it were being used for military purposes, and even then, an attack would still need to meet necessity, distinction, proportionality, and precaution requirements. Investigators would examine the target, available intelligence, weapon choice, timing, warnings, and expected civilian presence.

The source reports a drone strike involving multiple munitions and 153 deaths, but it does not establish the legal facts needed for a final assessment. Responsibility and legality require an impartial investigation. If civilians were intentionally targeted or excessive harm was foreseeable, the attack could amount to a serious violation.