October 23, 2026
In a remarkable development that reflects a more clear involvement in the ongoing Sudanese conflict, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu included the “Rapid Support Forces” among the list of allies of Israel and the UAE in the region, in an official map that he presented to journalists to present his vision for national security.
This revelation came through an analysis prepared by journalist Roi Kayes on the Kan News network, representing the first time that Israel has taken a public and frank position on the side of one of the parties to the civil war in Sudan, which is considered one of the worst humanitarian crises and the bloodiest and most complex wars in the world.
The classification of the “Rapid Support Forces” as an ally raises a serious problem, given the accusations directed at the militia led by Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo of committing widespread violations that include killing large numbers of civilians, practicing systematic sexual violence, and targeting non-Arab minorities in the Darfur region. On the other hand, the other party, represented by the Sudanese army, is not immune from accusations, as it has been accused of committing widespread massacres and accusations of using chemical weapons during the conflict.
The analysis raises fundamental questions about Tel Aviv’s motives and interests in making its choices in a war in which its closest allies did not take sides. The United States refuses to align itself with either party, contenting itself with exerting pressure to reach a settlement, while the UAE is trying to publicly distance itself from the accusations directed at it of supporting “rapid support.”
At the regional level, the Israeli position is particularly sensitive. Despite Iranian support for the Sudanese army, Egypt and Saudi Arabia support the same military establishment, which means the absence of a clear strategic justification that pushes Israel towards a possible political confrontation with Cairo and Riyadh regarding this complex issue.
The analysis concludes by raising critical questions about the feasibility of this step and whether it will serve Israeli interests, or contribute to expanding the path of normalization and confronting Iranian influence, or will it involve Tel Aviv in a new space of political conflict and an uncalculated regional cost, especially with its departure from Washington’s political pattern and its intersection with conflicting regional interests.
