Analysis: Sudan’s War of Words Spills onto Digital Battlegrounds

In the heart of Sudan’s ongoing conflict, a new digital battleground has emerged where truth is increasingly difficult to discern from fiction. According to a newly published paper by researcher Selma El Obeid, the propaganda war between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has created an information ecosystem where fact and fabrication blur seamlessly together.

The study, “Sudan wartime online propaganda,” released today by the French Institute for International Relations (IFRI), reveals how the absence of independent field journalism has created fertile ground for misinformation to flourish. With few international reporters on the ground to verify claims, social media has become the primary battlefield for narrative control.

Both the SAF and RSF have developed sophisticated propaganda networks, employing tactics ranging from coordinated disinformation campaigns to outright censorship. However, the research indicates that despite these efforts, neither group has managed to establish complete control over information flows.

“The digital landscape in Sudan has become a complex web of competing narratives,” notes El Obeid’s research, which analyzed thousands of social media interactions. The study found that military officials, political figures, and social media influencers have created interconnected networks that amplify partisan messaging while drowning out neutral voices.

Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) have emerged as the dominant platforms for these information wars, with two distinct content creator categories gaining prominence: live streamers providing real-time updates and YouTubers offering more produced content that shapes public perception of the conflict.

The propaganda ecosystem extends beyond the warring military factions. While SAF and RSF supporters represent the most vocal and organized groups online, the study also identified anti-war voices connected to the Forces of Freedom and Change (FFC), the former civilian coalition that briefly shared power before the conflict erupted.

What makes this information war particularly concerning is the diversity of actors involved. El Obeid’s research distinguishes between genuine ideological supporters of each faction and opportunistic participants motivated by financial gain or hidden political agendas. This mix of authentic and mercenary voices further complicates efforts to identify reliable information.

The consequences of these propaganda battles extend far beyond social media. The study concludes that these information campaigns have significantly weakened Sudan’s already fragile national unity, created deeper societal divisions, and effectively sabotaged peace initiatives that might otherwise have gained traction.

Perhaps most troublingly, the research suggests that the digital propaganda war is actively prolonging the physical conflict by hardening positions and making compromise increasingly difficult to achieve. As narratives become more entrenched, the space for dialogue narrows.

The challenge is compounded by the technical sophistication of these campaigns. Both sides have developed networks capable of rapidly amplifying messages, creating trending topics, and flooding platforms with coordinated content that overwhelms more nuanced perspectives.

Media literacy experts have long warned about the vulnerability of conflict zones to information warfare. Sudan represents a case study in how modern conflicts unfold simultaneously on physical and digital fronts, with victories in the information space sometimes valued as highly as territorial gains.

For international organizations and humanitarian groups working in Sudan, navigating this complex information environment presents significant challenges. Aid organizations must constantly verify reports about access routes, civilian needs, and conflict developments against a backdrop of contradictory claims.

As the conflict continues, the paper suggests that international platforms bear some responsibility for allowing their services to be weaponized in ways that exacerbate human suffering. While social media companies have implemented policies to address disinformation in Western contexts, conflict zones like Sudan often receive less consistent moderation attention.

The findings underscore the urgent need for independent journalism and verification mechanisms that can help Sudanese citizens and international observers separate fact from fiction in one of Africa’s most complex humanitarian crises.