Tensions escalate as Sudan shoots downs Emirati plane carrying mercenaries, weapons
The Sudanese Air Force reportedly downed an Emirati aircraft suspected of transporting mercenaries and equipment for paramilitary forces.
The incident, occurring at Nyala Airport in South Darfur, escalates already tense relations between Sudan and the UAE.
This dispute underscores the worsening dynamics between the countries amidst Sudan's ongoing conflict.
The incident, which took place at Nyala airport in South Darfur, a region controlled largely by the RSF marks a dramatic escalation in the already f raught relationship between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi.
According to state-run television aligned with the army, the Sudanese air force launched a surprise airstrike on the runway of Nyala International Airport in South Darfur early Wednesday.
The report, citing military sources, said the strike targeted a group of Colombian mercenaries arriving aboard a private aircraft believed to have taken off from a Gulf airbase.
The airstrike destroyed the plane and killed at least 40 people, identified by Sudanese authorities as foreign fighters.
The Sudanese army, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, has long accused the UAE of funnelling arms and personnel into Sudan through Nyala airport.
Tensions peaked in May when Sudan's Security and Defence Council announced the severing of diplomatic ties with the UAE, formally declaring it a 'state of aggression.'
These claims have been echoed in reports by UN experts, U.S. officials, and international organisations, though the UAE has repeatedly denied any involvement.
More diplomatic fallout as UAE bars Sudanese carriers
Tensions between the United Arab Emirates and Sudan further escalated following an announcement by Sudan's Civil Aviation Authority that Emirati authorities have banned all Sudanese aircraft from landing at UAE airports.
The agency also reported that a Sudanese airliner was recently barred from taking off from Abu Dhabi, signalling a sharp deterioration in aviation ties between the two countries.
According to the Sudan Tribune, staff at Sudanese carriers Badr and Tarco said UAE civil aviation authorities had blocked their flights to and from Dubai and Sharjah without providing any explanation.
The abrupt decision, issued after passengers on a Tarco flight had already completed departure formalities, caused confusion and disruption at Port Sudan airport.
The Sudanese government has expressed surprise at the move and said it is working with airlines to reprogramme flight schedules for passengers travelling to and from the Gulf country.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sudan military destroyed UAE plane carrying Colombian mercenaries: State TV
Sudan's air force has destroyed a UAE aircraft carrying Colombian mercenaries as it was landing at an airport in Darfur controlled by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), army-aligned state TV reported. The attack late on Wednesday killed at least 40 people, the state broadcaster reported. The airport has recently come under repeated air strikes by the Sudanese army, which has been at war with the RSF since April 2023. A military source, speaking to the AFP news agency on condition of anonymity, said the Emirati plane 'was bombed and completely destroyed' at Darfur's Nyala airport. There was no immediate comment from the RSF. AFP quoted an Emirati official denouncing what he considered false allegations that the Sudanese army had destroyed the plane. Colombia's President Gustavo Petro said his government was trying to find out how many Colombians died in the attack. 'We will see if we can bring their bodies back,' he wrote on X. State TV said the aircraft had taken off from an airbase in the Gulf, carrying dozens of foreign fighters and military equipment intended for the RSF, which controls nearly all of army, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, has long accused the United Arab Emirates of supplying advanced weaponry, including drones, to the RSF via Nyala Airport. Abu Dhabi has denied the accusations. Satellite images released by Yale University's Humanitarian Research Lab have shown multiple Chinese-made long-range drones at the airport of the South Darfur state capital. On Monday, Sudan's army-aligned government accused the UAE of recruiting and funding Colombian mercenaries to fight for the RSF, claiming it has documents proving that. Reports of Colombian fighters in Darfur date back to late 2024 and have been confirmed by United Nations experts. Colombia seeks to ban mercenaries This week, the Joint Forces – a pro-army coalition in Darfur – reported more than 80 Colombian mercenaries fighting on the RSF's side in el-Fasher, the last Darfur state capital still under army control. The army also released video footage it said was of 'foreign mercenaries believed to be from Colombia', which could not be independently verified. In December, Sudan said Colombia's Foreign Ministry had expressed regret 'for the participation of some of its citizens in the war'. Colombian mercenaries, many former soldiers and guerrillas, have appeared in other global conflicts and were previously hired by the UAE for operations in Yemen and the Gulf. In his post on Wednesday, Petro said he was moving to ban mercenary activity, calling it 'a trade in men turned into commodities to kill'. As fighting continues, thousands of families trapped in the besieged city of el-Fasher are at 'risk of starvation', the UN's World Food Programme (WFP) has warned. An outbreak of cholera in the North Darfur state, of which el-Fasher is the capital, has further added to the misery. Sudan's war, now in its third year, has killed tens of thousands, displaced 13 million, and plunged the nation into the world's worst hunger and displacement the daily Crossword
Fox News
18 hours ago
- Fox News
List of countries taking in illegal immigrant deportees grows with latest African partners
President Donald Trump's mass deportation efforts gained new momentum this week when Rwanda signed a formal third-country agreement, part of a broader push to partner with nations willing to accept deportees whose home countries refuse to take them back or present other barriers. Officials in Rwanda agreed to take in 250 illegal immigrants in a deal forged with the State Department Tuesday, joining nearly a half-dozen other nations that have done the same. When the talks between Washington and Kigali began earlier this year, Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe said the idea is not new to his country, as it previously forged a similar deal with the United Kingdom that was nixed by a London court. Illegal immigrants deported from the U.S. will be given help to get back on their feet, according to a spokesperson for Rwandan President Paul Kagame. They will need to be individually approved for resettlement and then receive "workforce training, healthcare and accommodation to jump-start their lives in Rwanda," the spokeswoman, Yolande Makolo, told the BBC. In another African nation, Eswatini, named Swaziland until 2018, five foreign nationals were deported from the U.S. to Mbabane in July. But that operation reportedly lacked the same formal third-country agreement as Rwanda. The tiny landlocked country, the last absolute monarchy on the continent, abuts Mozambique and South Africa. The deported men were all convicted of crimes ranging from battery to murder to gang activity and methamphetamine-related offenses. "This flight took individuals so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back," DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. "These depraved monsters have been terrorizing American communities, but thanks to [Trump and Secretary Kristi Noem] they are off of American soil." The convicts hailed from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba and Yemen. A spokesman for King Mswati III, who has ruled Eswatini since 1986, told the BBC Eswatini hopes to "facilitate" returning the criminals to their homelands. South Sudan also received eight deportees in July. Boston federal Judge Brian Murphy issued a preliminary injunction blocking Sudanese deportations and others, ruling migrants needed opportunities to file for protection under a U.S. diplomatic Convention Against Torture (CAT) that precludes expatriation to dangerous countries. The Supreme Court later stayed Murphy's ruling. In February, Costa Rica agreed to accept 200 deported migrants, which included some foreign nationals from India, according to VisaVerge. That nation's law allows temporary migrant sheltering. The government in San Jose also reportedly forged a $7.8 million deal in which the U.S. would help it deport immigrants, according to Reuters. The wire service further confirmed the February report. Also in February, Panama's foreign ministry told CBS News its first flight of about 200 non-Panamanian deportees arrived from the U.S. under another agreement forged with Washington. The U.S. will cover the cost of those deportations, which included migrants of mostly Asian descent, from countries like China, Uzbekistan, Nepal, India and Vietnam. Migrants from as far afield as Cameroon and Iran were also reportedly among the group. The most visible country to aid in deportation efforts has been El Salvador, where congressional Democrats flew after a suspected human trafficker living in Maryland was deported to its infamous CECOT prison. Democrats like Hunter Biden have called out the Trump administration for the effort, which has been met by incredulous responses, such as a retort from Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele. Bukele poked fun at Biden's past drug use in response, asking on X if he was "sniffing powdered milk" when the former first son claimed he would threaten to invade El Salvador if he were elected president and if it refused to return deportees. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., was the first to fly to San Salvador to visit Garcia, a trip that appeared to inspire more Democrats to go and others to attempt to gain entry into domestic ICE sites in Newark, Baltimore and New York City.
UPI
2 days ago
- UPI
Border disputes persist in Latin America
Some border disputes in Latin America wind up in the International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands. Photo by Lina Selg/EPA Aug. 7 (UPI) -- "Colombia will not lose its Amazon River," Colombian President Gustavo Petro wrote this week on X. With that, the president continued to fuel a diplomatic dispute that began days ago with Peru, which he accused of occupying Colombian territory. Petro claimed Tuesday that the Peruvian government had taken control of Santa Rosa Island, situated in a disputed section of the Amazon River. He criticized Peru's Congress for creating the new district of Santa Rosa de Loreto, arguing that the area belongs to Colombia under the 1934 Rio de Janeiro Protocol. Peruvian President Dina Boluarte criticized Petro's remarks, saying they do not contribute to regional integration or the strengthening of bilateral relations. Peru's foreign ministry issued a formal protest, calling the statements an "unacceptable disregard" for the country's sovereignty. Colombian Interior Minister Armando Benedetti said the government may take the dispute to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. In response, Peru deployed military personnel to the area. The diplomatic conflict has become a reminder that, despite progress in regional integration, Latin America's borders remain sources of tension. From century-old disputes to recent conflicts sparked by natural resource discoveries, territorial disagreements remain a persistent challenge throughout the region. One of the most recent disputes involves Venezuela's claim of sovereignty over more than 61,000 square miles west of the Essequibo River, a region administered by Guyana. The conflict dates back to the 19th century, when Venezuela accused Britain of encroaching on the area. Despite an 1899 arbitration ruling, Venezuela has never recognized the established border, and the dispute has escalated in recent years after Guyana's discovery of vast oil reserves in the region. President Nicolás Maduro's government revived the claim through a nonbinding referendum and declared the territory a new state, heightening tensions. The International Court of Justice intervened, urging Venezuela to refrain from any action that could alter the current situation. However, Maduro's administration has rejected the court's jurisdiction. The United States, which has conducted joint military exercises with Guyana, adds a sensitive geopolitical dimension to the dispute. Bolivia's demand for access to the Pacific Ocean remains one of the most sensitive and longstanding issues in its relationship with Chile. The landlocked country lost its coastline during the War of the Pacific (1879-1884). Bolivia brought the case to the ICJ, asking the court to compel Chile to negotiate sovereign access to the sea. In 2018, however, the court ruled in favor of Chile, stating that it is under no obligation to negotiate. Despite the ruling, Bolivia's maritime claim remains a state policy and a central issue in its foreign policy, keeping tensions between the two nations alive. The border between Costa Rica and Nicaragua -- largely defined by the San Juan River -- has been a source of conflict for more than 150 years. The dispute centers on navigation rights along the river, a historically vital route for trade and transportation. In 2010, a Nicaraguan dredging project on the San Juan River triggered a diplomatic crisis. Costa Rica accused its neighbor of invading its territory in the Isla Calero area. The dispute was brought before the ICJ, which ruled in favor of Costa Rica. Despite the ruling, sovereignty over the river and its surrounding areas remains a sensitive issue in bilateral relations, reflecting a history of confrontation and mistrust. Guatemala and Belize are locked in another longstanding territorial dispute. Guatemala claims nearly 4,600 square miles of Belizean territory, a conflict that dates to the 19th century, when Guatemala refused to recognize a border treaty with the United Kingdom, arguing that Belize was part of its territory. Both countries agreed in 2008 to submit the case to the International Court of Justice for a final resolution. The process remains ongoing and represents a hopeful step toward settling a dispute that has dragged on for more than 150 years through diplomatic means.
