By Feras Dalatey Residents gather in a street after Friday prayers to celebrate the arrest of Amjad Yousef, a key suspect in the 2013 Tadamon massacre, in Tadamon, Syria, April 24, 2026. REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi April 24 - Syria's Interior ​Ministry said on Friday it had arrested the main suspect in the 2013 Tadamon massacre, ‌one of the worst acts of violence attributed to the former government of Bashar al-Assad, in which 288 civilians were killed. The ministry released footage of Amjad Yousef’s arrest in the Al-Ghab Plain area of Hama province in western Syria, near ​his hometown. Yousef had been hiding there since the overthrow of Assad at the end of ​2024, a security source told Reuters. U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack welcomed the ⁠arrest in a post on X, calling it an important step towards accountability for atrocities committed during ​Syria’s war. DOCUMENTING THE MASSACRE Yousef, 40, a former member of military intelligence under Assad, was thrust into the spotlight ​in April 2022 when the UK's Guardian newspaper published videos provided by two academics that they said showed him forcing blindfolded civilians to run towards a pit in the Tadamon neighbourhood of southern Damascus before shooting them. Annsar Shahoud, a researcher at ​the University of Amsterdam Holocaust and Genocide Centre and one of the academics, spent four years documenting ​the massacre. Posing as an online fangirl, Shahoud gained Yousef's trust and ultimately obtained his confessions both on video and audio ‌recording. Reuters was ⁠unable to reach Yousef for comment as he has been taken into custody. The massacre is one of the most egregious documented incidents of violence attributed to the Assad government during the 14-year bloody war that began in 2011. After Assad's fall at the end of 2024, civilians, media outlets and international organisations went to ​the site of the massacre ​to inspect it and ⁠interview witnesses. Locals refer to the site as "Amjad Yousef's Pit". It has been marked on Google Maps as "The Site of the Tadamon Massacre". Ahmed Adra, a Tadamon resident ​and a member of the neighbourhood committee, said victims' families had been celebrating ​in the ⁠streets since morning. "We will take white roses and plant them at the site of the massacre and tell the victims that their memory is alive and that justice is being served," he told Reuters. Shahoud said she now ⁠felt safe ​with Yousef in custody, but added the path to justice in ​Syria was unclear and did not include all perpetrators. "I feel safe now, despite the distance, because I always felt for years that ​this person was after me," she told Reuters. © 2026 Reuters. All rights reserved

Commemorating the 1994 Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda, Catholic University, Washington DC Saturday, April 25, 2:00 PM

By Michał Jagielski Genocide Watch Migrants wait at the Polish-Belarusian border on November 18, 2021 in Grodno, Belarus. Thousands of people are trapped in freezing conditions at the Poland-Belarus border. (Sefa Karacan/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) Poland is not unique in its selective humanitarianism. As the EU’s decision to restrict asylum rights for certain groups showed, the entire continent suffers from a neo-racist attitude towards migrants. However, Poland constitutes a case in which the dynamic between neo-racism and securitization is clearly visible. It was much easier for Poles to accept Ukrainian refugees because they were accustomed to their presence. The cultural, linguistic, and biological similarities did not threaten Polish identity and security. On the other hand, even the possibility of allowing refugees from the MENA region to settle in the country provoked widespread outrage. Through securitizing the issue, both the EU and Poland have created an echo chamber that not only fuels fear but also conditions the public to normalize violence and reframe it as “common sense.” On a domestic level, the decision to securitize migration has been influenced by the public’s growing fear for their safety and the survival of Polish culture, fears that have rarely been challenged. Housing crises, inflation, insufficient healthcare, and the rising cost of living have all been reframed through the lens of “the Other,” diverting attention from structural issues to marginalized groups. Without meaningful educational or rhetorical opposition, these fears are reinforced, creating a cycle where public acceptance of institutional and physical violence becomes normalized. Over time, society is being conditioned to perceive people of different cultures and faiths as lesser human beings. Even though Poland’s conduct is not genocidal in and of itself, its impact on the public has the potential to be profound. It establishes a fertile ground for hatred and mass violence against specific groups to flourish. Therefore, the country’s migration policy is not simply a matter of border control: it is a deliberate shaping of public consciousness around who is worthy of protection and who can be subjected to violence. Full report:

UK Foreign Office unit tracking Israel’s potential breaches of international law closes due to cuts The Guardian, Patrick Wintour and Sinéad Campbell, 23 April 2026 Destroyed buildings in Gaza. Photograph: NurPhoto EXCLUSIVE: OFFICIALS WARN DEPARTMENT WILL ALSO LOSE ACCESS TO DATABASE OF 26,000 VERIFIED INCIDENTS DUE TO CUTS The Foreign Office unit tracking potential breaches of international law by Israel in Gaza and more recently Lebanon has been closed because of cuts within the department, the Guardian can reveal. The decision to shut the international humanitarian law cell follows a review by Olly Robbins, the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office dismissed last week by the prime minister over the Peter Mandelson scandal. Only a fortnight ago, the foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, said respect and support for international law would be one of the linchpins of the department under her leadership in her major annual set piece foreign policy speech. The decision also means funding for the Conflict and Security Monitoring Project run by the Centre for information Resilience (CIR) will end. The centre had been doing a range of work for the Foreign Office, including the world’s largest open-source monitoring of incidents across Israel, Palestine and Lebanon. It is the only programme in the UK that collects, verifies and analyses human rights and conflict incidents in Israel and the occupied territories. The closure of the IHL cell is part of a cut in funding to the conflict and atrocity prevention team, which has been critical in warning the Foreign Office of potential atrocities, including in Sudan. Officials have been warned the closure of the Conflict and Security Monitoring project will mean the Foreign Office will lose access to a database of 26,000 verified incidents in the Middle East. The database holds information on incidents stretching back to 7 October 2023, the day Hamas fighters launched the attack on Israel that killed 1,200 people, mainly civilians, and led to the abduction of 200 Israelis. It is thought to be the largest database of its kind in the world and is used to monitor trends and make analyses possible. The database is also used to help Foreign Office teams decide whether arms export control licences to Israel should remain suspended, and helps officials conclude whether international humanitarian law concerns such as proportionality are being breached. It is understood the head of the war crimes team in the counter-terrorism unit urged the Foreign Office to understand how important the work of the CIR was in helping the Metropolitan police consider war crimes allegations. As well as maintaining the database, the CIR has conducted more than 20 open-source investigations, including into the potentially unlawful shooting of minors in Gaza. The UK embassies in Tel Aviv, Beirut and Damascus, as well as the consulate in Jerusalem, have turned to the CIR for rapid assessments of large incidents. The Israel-Gaza conflict map it has provided has had tens of thousands of views, once more than 25,000 views in one day. The cuts appear to be driven by the decision to cut the overseas aid budget to 0.3% of gross national income despite maintaining the target to reach 0.7% when resources allow. But Robbins was also pushing through a restructuring at head office that was leading to the closure of a range of teams including the IHL cell. In her Mansion House speech, Cooper said: “It might be tempting to think that international law and the role of international frameworks are out of date, and that in championing them, we somehow cherish rules over national interests. Well, I reject that view, because we’re not just defending the status quo. “The role that rules-based frameworks play is vital, and respect for the rule of law is a core British value that supports our national interest, underpins our economic stability, makes us a reliable place for international investment, while the whole world spins around us and underpins our security and prosperity. “It’s in Britain’s interests to be a dependable power, a country that keeps its word, a stable base for investment and a partner of choice.” Yasmine Ahmed, the UK director of Human Rights Watch, said it was damning that the government was choosing to cut the unit at a time when there were “continued significant violations of international law and atrocity crimes being committed across the world”. “It makes me question the extent to which this government is complying with its obligations under the arms export criteria and its obligations under the arms trade treaty, as well as obligations that it’s meant to be discharging under the genocide convention,” she said. Katie Fallon, the advocacy manager at Campaign Against Arms Trade, said closing the IHL cell would protect ministers and senior Foreign Office officials “who know that they have been manipulating the data on potential violations of IHL, beyond any logical interpretation, to obscure unimaginable violations and crimes committed against the most vulnerable people in conflict and sustain arms sales at any cost”. “The timing of this closure is notable,” she said. “As Olly Robbins explained to a parliamentary committee this week, the civil service is under pressure to give the government the answers that they want. Nowhere is this more clear than on ensuring arms sales to ‘allies’ continue, despite the risks of war crimes.” The Foreign Office has been contacted for comment. © 2026 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr) Genocide Watch comments: This represents a crucial misstep in the route for accountability of Israeli human rights violations. In order to hold the perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and human rights violations responsible, detailed reporting tracking instances which breach international law must remain a priority of states. International law must be respected, and it is up to states to ensure that it receives the respect it deserves. International law only works if states uphold it collectively.

By Cooper Denison Sub-Saharan Africa Analyst Genocide Watch The Dollo Ado Encampment in southwestern Ethiopia, home to one of the largest refugee concentrations globally. Credit: UNICEF 2012 Ethiopia harbors one of the largest refugee concentrations in Africa, accommodating just under a million displaced people from across the continent’s eastern stretch. Somali refugees account for nearly one-third of this population—around 300,000 individuals. Despite the size and relative embeddedness of the Somali community in the country, refugees face considerable socio-economic discrimination, as well as a culture of physical and sexual violence. This vulnerability is driven by a unique intersection of culture stigma, weak legal protections, and systemic barriers within encampments themselves, particularly limited access to key resources. As in the rest of the world, Somali women and girls bear the brunt of such challenges.  This report discusses the complex realities of Somali refugees living in Ethiopia, focusing on the hardships they encounter, the violence they endure, and the ways in which the international community continues to fail them. Additionally, the report will offer a series of conclusions, policy recommendations, and suggestions for further research.

By Michał Jagielski Senior Middle East and Iran Analyst Genocide Watch Syrian Kurds protesting outside a U.S.-led international coalition base near the Turkish border in Syria. Photo: Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images A decade after the establishment of CJTF-OIR, it appears that the alliance between the U.S. and the SDF is at an end. Initially, the Kurdish-led forces were the most reliable ally for Washington’s multilayered Syrian policy aimed at countering ISIS and the growing influence of Moscow and Tehran. Years-long exposure to U.S. weaponry and training have shaped DAANES and SDF into competent entities, capable of governing diverse territories, although not without occasional sectarian favoritism. The U.S.' reliance on its Kurdish allies and the costs they had to pay in their fight against ISIS have, in the eyes of many, warranted a seat at the negotiating table for the Kurds. Yet the recent changes in Syria’s domestic situation have revealed that U.S. policy has been utilitarian rather than ideological.  The policy towards the Kurds and their quest for increased autonomy has been motivated by strategic interests. The U.S. has supported the Kurds in their goals when those goals served Washington’s political objectives. This attitude has created a cycle of short-term empowerment of the Kurds, followed by periods of instability, repression, and diminishing autonomy. That is not to say that U.S. policy in the region is opaque. On the contrary, the objectives have been largely coherent. What changed is not the underlying reasoning behind the policy, but the preferred tools by which it is to be achieved. When compared to how the Kurds were treated under the Assad regime, their situation has improved because of U.S. support. Al-Sharaa’s guarantees offered to the Kurds would have been unimaginable 15 years ago. Nevertheless, a large portion of the Kurdish community in Syria and its leadership expected more, believing that the alliance with the U.S. would bring about a level of lasting autonomy. The example of the SDF has the potential to put future alliances between regional ethnic minorities and the U.S. in doubt. Full report:

An LGBTQ+ rights supporter holds a flag in the hallway outside an Iowa House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, Jan. 31, 2024, at the Statehouse, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File) By MATT BROWN Updated 1:55 AM HST, April 21, 2026 WASHINGTON (AP) — The Human Rights Campaign, one of the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations, is vaulting into the midterms with a $15 million investment targeting Republicans in battleground districts after a series of setbacks in recent years. “I think that this is the election that’s going to be the sea change, not only for getting to a pro-equality majority but for changing the momentum on this fight for equality,” said Kelley Robinson, the Washington-based organization’s president, in an interview with The Associated Press. “This movement is ready for its next wind, its second wind.” Besides eight congressional districts that could help determine control of the U.S. House, the Human Rights Campaign is also supporting Democratic candidates for the U.S. Senate in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio and Texas. The money will be spent on advertising, events and canvassers. The LGBTQ+ movement has been reckoning with a wave of defeats on the campaign trail and in the courtroom that have left Democrats struggling to regain their footing. President Donald Trump’s Republican administration has rolled back protections for transgender people, such as banning them from serving in the military and cutting off gender-affirming care for children. The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority has upheld Republican states’ restrictions while striking down bans on “conversion therapy” practices in Democratic states. “I believe that our movement made ourselves believe that we were closer to equality than we actually are,” Robinson said. “The last few years, we’ve been doing an incredible amount of listening, of learning, also of repositioning this work.” After the 2024 presidential election, Democrats were divided over the role that LGBTQ+ rights played in their party’s losses. The Trump campaign ran a series of advertisements mocking Vice President Kamala Harris for supporting medical gender transitions for incarcerated people and highlighting the issue of transgender people playing on women’s sports teams. “Kamala Harris is for they/them,” said a voice-over in one national ad. “President Trump is for you.” Robinson argued that the ad was effective because of an implicit economic message, not for its critiques of the policy toward transgender people. But conservative activists and some moderate Democrats have argued such stances are too unpopular with swing voters. “There’s a real disconnect between most voters and the party elite,” said Leor Sapir, a fellow with the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. He added, “If I’m a Democrat consultant, my advice would be: Do everything in your power to keep this issue off the public agenda.” Robinson said her organization has been soul-searching on how to best craft winning messages on LGBTQ+ rights. “Our job is to move away from the fireballs that our opposition wants to talk about and instead find a way to get back to the things that are impacting folks every day,” she said. In January, the Human Rights Campaign published a guide to blunting conservative attacks on LGBTQ+ issues, citing the successful campaigns of Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear. Although the guide encourages candidates to “lead with your values” and “address concerns directly,” it also encourages them to “go big” and quickly pivot to issues like cost-of-living concerns. “I think the number one way to shut out a voter is to try to make them believe that their fears are not real. So what we coach candidates on doing is listening,” Robinson said. “For folks who have questions about the issues, that’s OK. We’re in a moment where the stakes in front of us are too high to look away.” Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

Italian lawyers could win ‘wild west-style bounties’ if immigration clients go home The Guardian, Angela Giuffrida, 19 April 2026 Giorgia Meloni in Rome on Saturday. The Italian prime minister is trying to clamp down on irregular immigration. Photograph: Cecilia Fabiano/LaPresse/ GIORGIA MELONI'S FAR-RIGHT GOVERNMENT TO ASK MPs TO BACK CONTROVERSIAL VOLUNTARY REPATRIATION SCHEME Italian lawyers will be paid bonuses if they successfully convince their immigrant clients to return home under a government plan that has been compared to a “wild west-style bounty”. The incentive is in the latest security bill from Giorgia Meloni’s far-right government and goes to the lower house of parliament for final approval this week. It was passed by the upper house after fiery debate. Meloni’s ruling coalition has earmarked €246,000 (£214,000) for the incentive this year, with funding almost doubling for 2027 and 2028. Lawyers who assist their foreign clients in accepting voluntary repatriation will receive a bonus, but only once the individual has returned to their country of origin. The bill does not stipulate the bonus amount but rough calculations by the Italian press equate it to about €615. The security bill also has a measure removing access to state-funded legal aid when challenging deportation orders. The bonus plan has provoked a fresh clash with Italian lawyers and magistrates a month after Meloni’s government was defeated in a referendum on a judicial overhaul. Italy’s national bar council said in a statement it was never informed about the measure and has urged parliament to scrap it. UCPI, which represents criminal lawyers, said the measure was “incompatible” with Italy’s constitution, adding that lawyers must not be paid to obtain an outcome desired by the state and must instead assist their clients “in full freedom and independence”. ANM, the magistrates’ union, said it was “dismayed” by the measure, warning that offering financial incentives linked to the outcome of migrant repatriation procedures risked undermining effective judicial protection. There has also been an angry response from the opposition. Riccardo Magi, leader of the leftwing Più Europa (More Europe) party, said the bonus was “basically a wild west-style bounty” in which “rights are trampled on and those who should protect the rights of foreign citizens are financially incentivised not to do so”. He described the security decree as “one step away from Trump’s ICE”, referring to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. Debora Serracchiani of the Democratic party said the bonus, alongside the loss of legal aid for lawyers assisting clients in appealing against deportation orders, was a “disgraceful” regulation that “undermines the very dignity of professionals”. She added: “This is yet another decree that only serves to repress and strip away rights.” Valentina D’Orso, of the Five Star Movement, accused the government of trying to “exploit lawyers by using them as a means to implement its immigration policies”. The measure is the latest step by Meloni’s ruling coalition, which has been weakened by the referendum defeat, to clamp down on irregular immigration. In February, the government approved a bill authorising naval blockades to stop boats arriving in Italy during periods of “exceptional” pressure. © 2026 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr) Genocide Watch Comments: This represents a direct affront on the legitimacy of the Italian judicial system as 're-migration' is essentially state sponsored This greatly reinforces xenophobic and anti-migrant sentiment in Italy as lawyers are incentivised to act as bountry hounters This could pave the way for numerous human rights violations

An Iranian flag is placed among the ruins of a police station destroyed during the U.S.-Israeli military campaign in Tehran on March 3. (Vahid Salemi/The Associated Press) Why the Israeli and US War in Iran and Lebanon is “Not Europe’s War” April 17, 2026 By Jeanne Macé and Alžběta Frommerová   Since the launch of the Israel and US war against Iran on February 28, 2026, European countries have been exposed to the consequences of a conflict they neither initiated nor sought to join. Beyond triggering an energy crisis, the Middle East war has shifted European leaders' attention away from Ukraine, plunged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into an existential crisis , and raised fears of a migration wave  and security threats  that will increase support for anti-immigrant  parties. Whether or not the current ceasefire in the Middle East holds, the war’s repercussions will be long-lasting for Europe.   Europe’s Collective Refusal to Follow Washington into War   Despite the difficulty European states faced in articulating a unified position since the outset of the war, the announcement of a two ‑ week ceasefire agreement between the United States (US) and Iran was broadly welcomed  by European Union (EU) members on April 8. European countries are widely represented in the coalition  launched by the United Kingdom (UK) to restore free passage through the Strait of Hormuz.   European nations are united in their  refusal  to become directly involved in the Israeli and US war. Their reluctance reflects a desire for autonomy from the US policy following a year of US President Trump’s threats and hostile actions. Since returning to the White House in January 2025, Donald Trump has imposed arbitrary tariffs  on European Union exporters. He engaged Russia in negotiations over Europe’s future while excluding both European countries and Ukraine. Trump incredibly blames Ukraine for Russia’s invasion and its genocide against Ukraine. Trump has declared his intention to seize Greenland , which for centuries has been a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, a loyal member of NATO.   Europe’s shared refusal to join the war against Iran reflects Europe’s memory of the collective trauma caused by its involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars . In 2003, American neoconservatives dragged the UK, Spain, and numerous post-communist Central and Eastern European states into the Iraq war, ignoring opposition from France and Germany. The George W. Bush administration created a division  between the “new Europe”, compliant with US policy, and the “old Europe” which resisted US domination. Today, European nations are determined  not to be drawn into another US-led war, regardless of Donald Trump’s aggressive attacks on NATO and his tariff blackmail policies.   Ukraine, the Collateral Victim   European countries have rejected military involvement in the Iran war because “This is not Europe’s war,” as EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas , stated. “Europe’s war is Ukraine.” As rising oil prices and suspension of US sanctions on Russian oil boost Russia’s wartime economy , Ukraine needs even greater financial and military support. Since the outbreak of the Iran war, Russia has earned over $150 million every day  in added sales of oil.   Meanwhile, the US administration has cut off most of its direct security assistance to Ukraine. Under European pressure, the US agreed to supply US made military equipment purchased from the US by Europeans under the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List ( PURL ) program implemented by NATO.   In early April, Donald Trump threatened   to block even those weapons supplies to Ukraine if European allies refused to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Before the temporary ceasefire agreement, the Pentagon was even considering redirecting  weapons bought by Europe for military assistance to Ukraine to resupply US arsenals depleted by the Iran war. The Trump regime has adopted a strategy of meddling  in the domestic political affairs of European countries. Trump and Vice President Vance have publicly endorsed a German right-wing party and directly campaigned for the autocratic Orban party in Hungary.   To prevent Ukraine from falling to Russia’s relentless aggression in Ukraine, European states and the EU must continue to support Ukraine independently of the NATO alliance. European leaders should also collectively condemn and counter attempts by Trump to interfere in their political affairs.   Europeans must maintain a firm stance against Putin’s goal of reestablishing the Russian and Soviet empire. The Belgian prime minister’s appeasement proposal  to normalize relations between the EU and Russia to secure cheaper energy supplies sparked a European outcry. The Iran war demonstrates how crucial energy independence  is to Europe’s defense strategy against Russian aggression.   European Division Weakens Europe   Despite their shared refusal to engage directly in the Iran war, European leaders have reacted in a fragmented  and inconsistent way to the Iran war. Most European states have not directly condemned the US and Israel for the illegality of their war under international law. The initial statement  by the E3 group (UK, Germany, France) emphasized the threat presented by Iran’s nuclear program without stressing the importance of complying with international law. The Italian Council of Ministers President, Giorgia Meloni, opted to “ neither condemn nor condone ” the war, kissing the golden ring of the narcissistic Donald Trump .   Finland, Norway   and Spain  were among the few European states to explicitly say “no to war” and to call on all parties to uphold international law. Spain denied  US forces permission to use their joint military bases of Rota and Morón. Spain also withdrew  its ambassador to Israel, and closed Spanish airspace  to American aircraft involved in strikes on Iran. Access to airspace by the US Airforce was also denied  by Italy and France., Switzerland and Austria invoked their wartime neutrality policy to deny access to US military aircraft.   Nevertheless, many countries, notably Germany , are reluctant to deny the United States access to their joint military bases out of respect for their obligations in NATO. The 31 permanent bases and 19 military sites operated  by the US across Europe are governed by bilateral agreements that allow the US to use them for NATO purposes. However, these military facilities remain under the sovereign control of European states. E uropean governments should leverage their strategic influence assertively to protect European interests when faced with the America First policies of the US President.   The End of NATO?   In response to the increasingly united policies of European countries toward the US, Donald Trump has openly threatened to withdraw  from the NATO alliance. US withdrawal would be a fatal blow to the world’s largest and most successful military alliance. US withdrawal from NATO would prove detrimental  to Europe. But it would also be disastrous for the US with its heavy reliance on its European allies for military bases, intelligence sharing, and diplomacy. Mediation  by Türkiye, NATO's second largest military power, might help prevent this strategic disaster. Withdrawal from NATO would require Congressional approval under US law. But Republican control of the US Congress makes this a weak reed to grasp.   US officials  have told their European counterparts to prepare to assume primary responsibility for Europe’s defense by 2027, Europeans could seize this opportunity to step out from under the US military umbrella. To do that, the EU would have to substantially increase its defense spending to compensate for the loss of US security. European defense budgets have already doubled since the Russian invasion  of Ukraine in 2022 and since Donald Trump’s return  to the White House. In countries with low growth and high public debt, financing massive rearmament will mean cutting social spending , w hich will increase social and political instability across Europe. Popular insecurity leads to the rise of “populist” security states led by right-wing parties.   The EU has historically struggled to achieve coordination in defense matters. This fact was demonstrated in 1954 by the failure  of the European Defense Community following the French Parliament’s rejection of the NATO treaty. European Union military decisions still require unanimity. With this barrier to acting swiftly and unanimously on defense issues, the future of European security will rest on a few powerful states : Germany, which has the fourth largest defense budget in the world, Poland which has the largest economy on Europe’s eastern front and already spends 4.5% of its GDP on defense, and France and the UK, the two European states that possess the strategic power of nuclear deterrence.   Spillover Risks   Military experts have outlined  two possible escalation scenarios outside the Middle East. One would be set off by Iranian strikes on the US military base in Türkiye that stores US nuclear weapons for Europe’s defense. A second would be a ballistic missile attack on Europe using long range missiles that could reach London or Paris.   Iran has launched  two long range ballistic missiles at the joint British - American military base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Neither hit its target.   Both these scenarios for escalation are unlikely. Iran is likely to limit attacks against countries beyond Israel, the US, and tiny Gulf states to avoid  widening the war and increasing the number of adversaries it must confront.  European governments are strengthening defense of critical infrastructure .  European countries fear  an increase in proxy-led terrorist attacks orchestrated by Iran, similar to the thwarted attack on March 29 against the Paris offices of Bank of America, which was allegedly  carried out by a pro-Iranian group that has called for attacks against the Jewish community in Europe.   A New Migrant Crisis in Europe and Strategic Opportunism for Far-Right Groups   Europeans fear  a new migration surge as refugees flee the wars in the Middle East. Lebanese  are likely to flee to Europe, as southern Lebanon has been emptied by Israeli evacuation orders and intense bombardment by the Israeli military in its war against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militia. The Israeli offensive has displaced more than 1.2 million  people in Lebanon - one-fifth of the country’s population.   The International Organization for Migration (IOM) has not yet recorded  a massive cross-border movement of refugees leaving Lebanon or Iran. But EU leaders, fearing a migration crisis like the Syrian displacement of 2015 , have already held consultations with Türkiye, the transit route between Iran and Europe. Türkiye has agreed to confine refugees at the border. Huge refugee camps could create a new humanitarian catastrophe.   Türkiye is leveraging its strategic geographical position and seeking to position itself as a mediator in numerous conflicts, particularly in the Middle East and Ukraine. Türkiye hopes to bolster its candidacy for acceptance into the European Union. European nations are asked to avert their eyes and ignore Türkiye's backsliding into authoritarianism and its commission of crimes against humanity  against Kurds in Türkiye, Iraq and Syria.   Anti-migrant parties  have already significantly increased their support all over Europe. The Iran war could have a long-term negative effect on European democracies. Temporarily ending Iran’s development of nuclear weapons is a laudable outcome for this war. But unless the theocratic tyranny in Iran is overthrown, the war will not be “won.” Only the Iranian people can do that. All democracies should generously support non-violent resistance by Iranians, the best way, the only good way, to defeat tyranny.   Genocide Watch Recommends: The EU should unite its foreign policy to resist authoritarian regimes in Russia, Iran, and the US. The EU should pressure Israel, the US, and Iran for lasting ceasefires in the wars in Iran and Lebanon. The EU should explicitly condemn the illegality of the Iran war and the US president's genocidal threats. The EU should pressure the United States to renew full US sanctions on Russian oil.

Sudan enters fourth year of war as officials lament an 'abandoned crisis' The Washington Post April 16, 2026 By Samy Magdy and Sam Mednick | AP Sudan is entering a fourth year of war marked by famine and massacres in what the United Nations calls an “abandoned crisis.” Patient Saidal Altaher, aged two months, receives treatment for malnutrition at the paediatric hospital stabilization center in Port Sudan, Sudan, Wednesday, April 15, 2026. (AP Photo/Bernat Armangue) PORT SUDAN, Sudan — Famine. Massacres. And now badly needed food  and other supplies are under strain. Sudan on Wednesday entered a fourth year of war  that’s been called an “abandoned crisis,” as a new Middle East conflict throws into shadow the fighting that has forced 13 million people to flee their homes. The North African country  is described as the world’s largest humanitarian crisis in terms of displacement and hunger. There is no end in sight to the fighting between the military and the paramilitary group Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, which witnesses and aid groups say has laid waste to parts of the vast Darfur region and committed genocide in El Fasher . Growing evidence shows the United Arab Emirates backing the genocidal Rapid Support Forces behind the scenes. Attempts by the United States and regional powers, now distracted by the Iran war , have failed to establish a ceasefire. “We’ve lost so many people in this war,” said Hussein Mohamed Shareef, running his fingers over the scar on his head where he said an RSF sniper had shot him in the city of Omdurman, near Khartoum, Sudan’s capital. He said at least 10 friends have been killed. Numbers tell a tale of pain At least 59,000 people  have been killed. At least 6,000 died over three days as the RSF rampaged through the Darfur outpost of el-Fasher in October, according to the United Nations, with U.N.-backed experts concluding that the offensive bore “the defining characteristics of genocide  .” More than 11,000 people have gone missing over the course of the war, the Red Cross says. The war has pushed parts of Sudan into famine. The number of people with severe acute malnutrition, the most dangerous and deadly kind, is expected to increase to 800,000, the world’s foremost experts on food security, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, said in February. About 34 million people, or almost two out of three Sudanese, need assistance, the U.N. says. Only 63% of health facilities remain fully or partially functional amid disease outbreaks, including cholera, according to the World Health Organization. At a center for malnourished children in the Red Sea city of Port Sudan, health staff weighed crying babies and fed some through a tube in their nose. The number of severely malnourished children entering the 16-bed center has doubled since the war began, to 60 a week, staff said. Several children often must share a mattress. “I don’t know what will happen in the coming days,” Dr. Osman Karrar said. Now fuel prices in Sudan have increased by more than 24% because of the Iran war and its effects on shipping, driving up food prices. “A plea from me: Please don’t call this the forgotten crisis. I’m referring to this as an abandoned crisis,” the top U.N. official in Sudan, Denise Brown, said Monday, criticizing the international community for failing to focus on ending the fighting. War could spread beyond Sudan The conflict exploded from a power struggle that emerged following Sudan’s transition to democracy after an uprising forced the military ouster of longtime autocratic President Omar al-Bashir  in April 2019. Tensions boiled over three years later, in April 2023 between Sudan’s military chief Gen. Abdel-Fattah Burhan, who chairs the ruling sovereign council, and RSF commander Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, who was Burhan’s deputy. Neither side can achieve a decisive victory, said Shamel Elnoor, a Sudanese journalist and researcher, adding that Sudanese “have become powerless and are subjected to foreign dictates.” Germany was hosting a Sudan conference in Berlin on Wednesday for governments, U.N. agencies and aid groups. The aim was to rally humanitarian donors and “promote an immediate ceasefire,” the German Development Ministry said. [Genocide Watch comment: "High level" conferences are talk-fests that have never stopped a genocide.] The Sudanese government in Khartoum, however, slammed the conference as an “unacceptable” interference and said Germany didn’t consult with Sudan before convening it. Sudan is now essentially divided between a military-backed, internationally recognized government in Khartoum and a rival RSF-controlled administration in Darfur. The military has established control over the north, east and central regions, including Sudan’s Red Sea ports and its oil refineries and pipelines. The RSF and its allies control Darfur and areas in the Kordofan region along the border with South Sudan. Both regions include many of Sudan’s oil fields and gold mines. While Egypt supports Sudan’s military, the UAE is accused by U.N. experts and rights groups of providing arms to the RSF. The UAE rejects the accusation despite overwhelming evidence of its complicity and arms shipments to the genocidal RSF. The Yale School of Public Health’s Humanitarian Research Lab, which tracks the war through satellite imagery, said this month that the RSF had received military support from a UAE built base in Ethiopia. The RSF didn’t comment on the allegation. Josef Tucker, senior analyst for the Horn of Africa at the International Crisis Group, told The Associated Press that the war could spill over Sudan’s borders, making the conflict “even more intractable.” Experts look at possible war crimes Three years of fighting have seen widespread atrocities such as mass killings of over 59,000 people and rampant sexual violence, including thousands of gang rapes. Hospitals, ambulances and medical workers in Sudan have been attacked, with more than 2,000 people killed, WHO has said. The International Criminal Court has said that it was investigating potential war crimes and crimes against humanity, particularly in Darfur, a region that two decades earlier, during Omar al-Bashir’s rule, became synonymous with genocide and war crimes. Al-Bashir has never been tried for his crimes. Most of the latest atrocities have been blamed on the RSF and their Janjaweed allies — Arab militias that were notorious for atrocities in the early 2000s against black people from the Fur, Masalit, or Zaghawa ethnic groups in Darfur. The RSF grew out of the Janjaweed. The military’s seizure of Khartoum and other urban areas in central Sudan in early 2025 did allow the return of about 4 million people to their homes, the U.N. migration agency said in March. But they struggle with damaged infrastructure and other challenges. “It’s not really a return to normal. It is trying to survive.” said Tjada D’Oyen McKenna, CEO of aid group Mercy Corps. Magdy reported from Cairo. Fatma Khaled in Cairo, Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations and Kirsten Grieshaber in Berlin contributed to this report. Copyright 2026 The Washington Post

A Sudanese woman who fled El Fashir (Str/AFP via Getty Images) I Have Watched the Catastrophe of My Country Be Reduced to Nothing New York Times April 15, 2026 By Mohammed Ahmed Mr. Ahmed is a Sudanese writer based in Seoul. The word “home” held two meanings in my life. One was the physical space of my childhood in Sudan: the textured walls of my room, the scent of my mother’s cooking, the squeak of ceiling fans pushing back against the endless summer heat. The other was an unspoken, fragile assumption that the land we stood on was permanent. On April 15, 2023, the war in Sudan erased both meanings. The news arrived in frantic, broken messages, reaching me halfway across the globe in South Korea, where I had left for college two years earlier. My family had fled and our house in Khartoum was ransacked. Photographs, books, the mundane artifacts of our daily lives were looted or scattered. An archive of my family’s story, built over several decades, suddenly became silent. For three years, I have watched this catastrophe be reduced to a headline, then a call for action, then nothing at all. The consequences of the war, meanwhile, read like a checklist of human suffering at its peak: the largest displacement crisis  in the world — nearly 13 million people, one in three Sudanese, have been forced out of their homes — amid extraordinary levels of food insecurity, countless cases of violence against women and children, and undeniable acts of genocide . The world, distracted by other calamities, has largely looked away. But the Sudanese people are not waiting to be saved. In the shadow of the world’s condescension, and in the face of terrible cruelty, we have built our own lifeline. Far from picturesque or photogenic, it is messy and exhausting and achingly slow. But the resilience is real, proof that our spirit cannot be crushed by suffering. Sudan’s plight is rooted not in poverty but in plunder. Under British colonial rule, Sudan’s resources — gold, cotton, gum arabic, even its people — were extracted for profit. After independence, the pattern continued: Oil was siphoned off  as successive regimes enriched themselves and their foreign patrons. Today, the same dynamic plays out with gold, of which Sudan has some of the African continent’s most significant reserves . This war has taken things to a new level of brutality. After the revolution of 2019 toppled the country’s dictator, the Sudanese Army and the Rapid Support Forces, a militia group, settled into an uneasy power-sharing arrangement. The R.S.F., whose roots are in the Janjaweed militias that carried out genocide in Darfur early this century, chafed under the control of the military. Tensions between the two forces and their leaders grew and grew. In April 2023, they broke out into open fighting. Foreign powers stepped in, with most regional countries supporting the army. But the United Arab Emirates, which had previously cultivated ties with the R.S.F., lost no time in backing the militia. The group could deliver what the U.A.E. coveted: access to the Red Sea and Sudanese gold. Since the war began, smuggled gold has flooded Dubai’s markets, gleaming in the city’s new gold district . The U.A.E. has even reportedly had a role in recruiting Colombian mercenaries  to fight alongside the R.S.F. in the conflict. Outsiders tend to call what is happening in Sudan a "civil war." The framing is convenient: It allows people to file Sudan away as another incomprehensible African tragedy, too complex to understand, too distant to matter. But there is nothing particularly Sudanese about Emirati drones or foreign mercenaries. What is happening in Sudan is entirely modern: a resource war fought by proxy, playing out against the world’s indifference. Those fleeing the violence have found scant welcome. Western countries that previously streamlined visa processing for Ukrainian and Syrian refugees did not extend the same courtesy  to Sudanese refugees. Several countries have imposed strict barriers  on Sudanese applicants, from callous travel bans  to stringent new regulations , often indefinitely delaying asylum claims and even short-term visas. In one tellingly egregious example of this spirit of exclusion, independent Sudanese filmmakers were recently denied entry  to Germany to attend a Berlinale industry gathering. We have had to help ourselves. In Sudanese Arabic, the word “ nafeer ”   describes a communal mobilization: When a village needs food to be harvested, everyone gathers; when a home is destroyed by a Nile flood, everyone rebuilds. For the past couple of years, nafeer has gone viral in the best sense. Diaspora WhatsApp groups raise thousands of dollars overnight. Young volunteers inside Sudan coordinate emergency aid kitchens , delivering meals to families who have not eaten in days. Sudanese physicians operate in clinics  under R.S.F.-controlled areas, risking death to heal the wounded. Multinational aid agencies, bound by bureaucracy and security protocols, have largely retreated to the relative safety of Port Sudan. [Genocide Watch comment: The UN Security Council and UN General Assembly have done nothing to stop the slaughter. The UK, which "holds the pen" on Sudan resolutions in the UN Security Council, won't even call the mass murder of tens of thousands of Sudanese "Genocide." Why does Sudan's colonial master "hold the pen" in the first place? Why does the UK with its complicity with the United Arab Emirates have any say at all?] Yet Sudanese volunteers with little funding, and hardly any recognition, have reached places the United Nations cannot. They are not waiting for permission. They are not waiting for cease-fires. They are simply doing what the Sudanese have always done: showing up for one another. This is the story the world fails to see — our stubborn refusal to surrender to misery. Nowhere is this more visible than in Khartoum. When the military recaptured the capital from the R.S.F. last year, hardly anyone was expected to return. But return they did. More than a million displaced Sudanese have come back  to Khartoum, not because it is safe or whole, but because it is home. In February, a Sudan Airways flight landed at Khartoum International Airport for the first time in nearly three years, carrying 160 passengers. It was a small but powerful sign that the capital was coming back to life. Map of Sudan showing areas controlled by Rapid Support Forces in light orange, Sudan Armed Forces in beige, and other rebel forces in green. Source: UAB Institute for Human Rights, from Adobe Stock. By Serhii. Asset ID: 817218906 The war continues. The R.S.F., weathering the army’s efforts to push it back , now controls almost all of Darfur in western Sudan. Last April, the militia claimed to have established a parallel administration there, proclaiming it the “Government of Peace and Unity.” The irony is not lost on those who have witnessed the group’s brutality: The same forces that have killed thousands  of civilians in ethnically targeted massacres now claim to govern in the name of peace. With the war in Iran spilling out into the U.A.E., the calculus has shifted. The country that fanned the flames in Sudan is suddenly preoccupied with threats at its own doorstep, a reminder that those who profit from chaos rarely get to control it for long. For Sudan, this distraction may provide some respite. No matter what, the Sudanese people — tenacious, resourceful, unbreakable — are here to stay. We remember what we lost. And we will make this rubble home again. A version of this article appears in print on April 18, 2026, Section A, Page 19 of the New York edition with the headline: Sudan Is Not in a Civil War. Copyright 2026 The New York Times Company