A government review seen by the Guardian says Britain declined more ambitious atrocity-prevention measures for Sudan even after intelligence warned that El Fasher could fall amid ethnic cleansing and possible genocide. Officials opted for the “least ambitious” of four options outlined in an internal Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) paper, the report found.
The options paper—drawn up during the 18-month siege of El Fasher—included measures such as creating an international protection mechanism to guard civilians against crimes against humanity and sexual violence. Six months into the siege, however, FCDO officials chose a lower-cost approach, citing cuts to aid, limited staffing and an overstretched country team.
Last month the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) seized El Fasher and, according to witness accounts and humanitarian organisations, immediately carried out ethnically motivated killings and mass sexual violence. Thousands of residents are missing, and satellite imagery shows fires and displacement around the city.
An Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) review dated October 2025 documents the decision and concludes that resource constraints led the UK to adopt the least ambitious prevention option. That option involved directing roughly an additional £10m to organisations including the International Committee of the Red Cross for protection-related activities, rather than establishing a broader prevention programme.
The ICAI report also says funding shortfalls and limited programme management capacity weakened the UK’s ability to prioritise protection for women and girls. A proposed programme focused on sexual violence was delayed and would only be ready in the medium to long term, from 2026.
Human rights specialists and some MPs condemned the choice. Critics argue that atrocities are preventable with political will, and say the decision reflects a deprioritisation of atrocity prevention that has “real-life consequences.” Sarah Champion, chair of the international development select committee, warned that cutting prevention in a time of shrinking aid budgets is shortsighted.
The appraisal nevertheless notes areas where the UK has had impact: it has provided more than £120m in aid to Sudan, shown political leadership and used its role as the UN Security Council penholder on Sudan to convene action. UK officials point to recent statements at the Security Council promising to hold RSF leaders accountable; the RSF denies harming civilians.
The ICAI review highlights a tension between diplomatic engagement and limited resources, concluding that inconsistent political attention and constrained funding reduced the UK’s ability to deliver stronger protection and earlier prevention measures for civilians in Darfur.
