The Government of Sudan has firmly denied recent United States allegations that it deployed chemical weapons in the capital, Khartoum. Officials in Khartoum have described the claims as unsubstantiated, citing a comprehensive report by the Federal Ministry of Health that found no evidence of chemical or radiological contamination.
According to the ministry, field investigations, clinical reports, and public health surveillance revealed no abnormal deaths, unexplained illnesses, or symptoms suggestive of poisoning in the capital. Forensic assessments similarly did not identify unusual causes of death. Radiation monitoring conducted in Khartoum showed levels within normal ranges, while no radioactive material or suspicious military residues were detected.
The Ministry of Health emphasised that the assessments were carried out with equipment accredited by both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), institutions recognised internationally for their oversight in the verification of nuclear and chemical safety. The government stated that testing began in April 2024, following the recapture of Khartoum by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) from the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
In June 2025, the United States imposed sanctions on Sudan, citing the alleged use of chemical agents during the conflict. At that time, Sudan rejected the accusations as “political blackmail” and a distortion of facts. Washington has not yet provided public evidence to substantiate its claims, while Khartoum has continued to maintain that its compliance with international monitoring standards demonstrates the absence of chemical or radiological threats.
Sudan has been engulfed in a devastating conflict since April 2023, when clashes erupted between the SAF and the RSF. The war has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands and the displacement of millions, deepening the humanitarian crisis in one of Africa’s most fragile states. Regional observers note that the allegations of chemical weapons use carry significant diplomatic weight, as they touch upon wider questions of international law, sovereignty, and the narratives often imposed on African conflicts by external actors.
Analysts argue that the Sudan case highlights how the framing of such conflicts is frequently shaped by competing geopolitical priorities rather than solely by verifiable evidence on the ground. Within Africa, there has been increasing emphasis on ensuring that the voices of affected populations and institutions are prioritised in interpreting the realities of war and peacebuilding, rather than relying exclusively on external narratives.
As Sudan continues to face immense challenges, the question of accountability and truth-telling remains central — both in addressing the humanitarian crisis and in navigating its fraught international relations.
