The European Union has imposed sanctions on Abdelrahim Hamdan Dagalo, deputy commander of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), in a move that places the bloc more firmly in efforts to respond to mass atrocities in Darfur and the wider civil war.
Dagalo, brother of RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo, is added to the EU’s autonomous sanctions regime on Sudan, facing an asset freeze and travel ban for what the Council describes as a “pivotal role” in RSF operations across Darfur and grave violations of international humanitarian law.
The decision follows months of documented abuses during the RSF’s campaign, including the siege and capture of El Fasher, the last Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) stronghold in Darfur, where reports of ethnic killings, widespread sexual violence and the obstruction of humanitarian aid have prompted warnings from the UN and human rights organisations.
A targeted addition to an expanding sanctions regime
The listing of Abdelrahim Dagalo is made under the framework first adopted in October 2023 for “activities undermining the stability and political transition of Sudan”. The regime allows the EU to sanction individuals and entities from both the SAF and RSF judged responsible for threatening peace, blocking aid, or committing serious human rights abuses.
Since its creation, the list has steadily grown. In January 2024, six entities linked to both sides of the conflict were added, reflecting concern over the financing and conduct of the war. Subsequent Council decisions in 2025 have adjusted and extended the measures, which now cover 11 individuals and eight entities and are in force until at least October 2026.
The new listing of Dagalo builds on this architecture but also signals a sharper focus on individual command responsibility for atrocities in Darfur. EU foreign ministers explicitly linked the measures to “serious and ongoing atrocities” attributed to the RSF and indicated readiness to add further names from any party obstructing Sudan’s political transition.
Arms deliveries and scrutiny of external backers
Alongside the personal sanctions, EU foreign ministers have renewed calls for an effective halt to arms deliveries to all parties to the conflict. The EU maintains an arms embargo on Sudan dating back more than three decades, but member states have come under pressure over exports to regional actors allegedly supplying weapons to the RSF.
Attention has focused in particular on the United Arab Emirates, accused by UN experts and several governments of providing arms and logistical backing to the RSF, allegations Abu Dhabi denies. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has said the bloc will pursue “diplomatic action” against those supporting the war and has reminded member states that EU export rules require denial of licences where there is a clear risk that equipment could be diverted into an ongoing conflict.
This places EU foreign policy at the intersection of targeted sanctions, existing embargoes and the political sensitivities of relations with Gulf states. For now, the focus remains on tightening implementation rather than introducing new EU-wide measures against external backers, but the political signal is that indirect supply routes are under closer scrutiny.
Coordination with US policy and international justice efforts
The EU move follows, and partly mirrors, earlier action by the United States. Washington sanctioned Abdelrahim Dagalo in September 2023 over atrocities in West Darfur and later determined in January 2025 that the RSF had committed genocide in Darfur, sanctioning Hemedti and several companies linked to RSF financing.
Both the EU and US now frame their measures as supporting accountability processes and reinforcing investigations by the International Criminal Court into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sudan. At the same time, Western governments are trying to support ceasefire diplomacy led by the US, Saudi Arabia and regional partners, while Sudan’s internationally recognised authorities insist that any ceasefire must not consolidate RSF control of key cities.
Questions over impact and the reach of EU foreign policy tools
The sanctions on Dagalo illustrate how the EU is using targeted measures to respond to mass-atrocity situations far beyond its borders. They carry concrete legal effects: any assets in the EU must be frozen, EU operators are barred from making funds or economic resources available to the listed individual, and Dagalo is banned from entering EU territory.
However, questions remain over practical impact. Senior RSF figures are not known to travel frequently to Europe, and it is unclear how much of their wealth is held in jurisdictions directly covered by EU law. The effectiveness of the measures will depend on how far they complicate financial arrangements, limit international legitimacy, and interact with sanctions and prosecutions pursued by other actors.
More broadly, the decision highlights a recurring issue in EU foreign policy: sanctions can signal political resolve and align the EU with international justice efforts, but they do not in themselves change battlefield dynamics or secure humanitarian access. In Sudan, where the UN warns of a conflict “spiralling out of control” and one of the world’s largest displacement and hunger crises, the scale of the emergency far exceeds the reach of any single instrument.
For EU policymakers, the listing of Abdelrahim Hamdan Dagalo is therefore both a legal step and a test case. It shows how the Union is prepared to act against individuals deemed responsible for atrocities and to apply wider pressure on those supplying weapons, while leaving open the question of how far targeted sanctions, even when coordinated with allies, can shape outcomes in a war that is increasingly fragmented and influenced by regional power politics.
