April 15 marked the start of a devastating conflict in Sudan, as witnessed by my family, our Sudanese community, and myself through various media channels and WhatsApp groups. We were in search of the latest updates about the situation unfolding across the ocean. The clashes between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces had escalated into the streets of Khartoum, wreaking havoc and leaving a path of destruction where a bustling capital once stood.
Distressing footage on social media showed terrified individuals seeking shelter on the floor of Khartoum International Airport amid heavy shelling. Scenes featuring doctors evacuating patients from the bombed Al Shaheeda Salma hospital were equally heartbreaking. The dire circumstances forced us to constantly reach out to our relatives, checking on their well-being. Eight months on, our eyes remain fixed on our phones, with Khartoum and other regions of Sudan still enduring the onslaught. As of December, the conflict has resulted in over 12,000 fatalities and displaced 6.7 million people, a situation described by the UN’s humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths as “one of the worst humanitarian nightmares in recent history.”
Witnessing cities morph into war zones has agonizingly altered my perception of “home,” which now seems shattered by the relentless pounding of rockets, artillery, and bombs. Many in the Sudanese diaspora mourn from afar, including my own loss of a grandfather who succumbed when the war cut off access to healthcare. From the start, explosive weapons have razed homes, neighborhoods, and vital infrastructure like hospitals, schools, and water treatment facilities. Notably, the Shambat Bridge, an architectural symbol linking Omdurman and Khartoum Bahri, fell in early November.
Civilians have remained perilously bound to their homes, as short-lived or failed truces offered inadequate time for evacuation from targeted cities. The term “explosive weapons” covers various munitions, including bombs, projectiles, and missiles, typically too imprecise or with too extensive a blast radius to be used in populated zones without causing indiscriminate damage unlawfully.
Sudan’s plight is not unique, with similar horrors reported in Gaza, Syria, and Ukraine. In Syria, recent bombardments in Idlib and Aleppo have displaced over 120,000 individuals, while Ukraine bears witness to Russian air raids on essential infrastructure like ports and grain facilities. In Gaza, Israel’s extensive use of explosive arms has led the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to refer to the region as a “graveyard for children,” with once densely populated areas now flattened. Additionally, Palestinian groups have launched rockets toward Israeli cities. Besides the immediate casualties, explosive weapons also destroy critical utilities, resulting in long-term repercussions while unexploded ordnance continues to pose risks to civilians and impedes the return of refugees and displaced people.
In a landscape seemingly consigned to devastation, the adoption of the Political Declaration on the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas by 83 countries offers a glimmer of hope. It acknowledges the urgent need to protect civilians from such weapons in civilian populated areas. The declaration encourages governments and military forces to establish rules and policies that safeguard civilians and urges the development of new norms to restrict bombings and shellings in these areas. Many nations bearing the brunt of explosive weapons in conflict zones have endorsed the declaration, including Cambodia, the Central African Republic, and Palestine. It has also gained support from notable producers and exporters of explosive weapons, such as France, South Korea, Turkey, and the United States.
Although Sudan recognizes the damage from these weapons, it hasn’t yet pledged to take action on a national level following the declaration. Despite not being legally binding, the declaration is an essential stride in mitigating human suffering during armed conflicts. Its effective implementation, alongside a humanitarian interpretation, is critical for civilian protection. The endorsement of more states is needed to stand in solidarity with families like mine, the Sudanese people, and all those enduring the tragedies of war. This moment should be seized, and the commitments within the declaration must be earnestly upheld to reduce the catastrophic impact of explosive weapons on civilians.
*Please note that the views expressed in this article belong to the author and may not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.*
