Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Dubai funding rsf in sudan
Executive Summary
The central claim is that Dubai (as part of the United Arab Emirates) has funded and materially supported the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan through weapons, logistical aid, and financial channels—especially the gold trade—and multiple investigations and sanctions lines corroborate parts of that picture. Reports from independent investigators, UN experts, NGOs and government actions present a consistent body of evidence tying UAE-based companies, Dubai-registered firms and Emirati logistical networks to RSF financing, while UAE officials deny state culpability and emphasize mediation and ceasefire efforts [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].
1. How the allegation is framed and who is accused — Dubai’s alleged nexus to RSF money and arms
The allegation as summarized in the material provided asserts that Dubai serves as a financial and logistical hub through which the RSF obtains weapons, revenue and laundering services, with specific emphasis on gold exports, Dubai-based companies, and UAE-linked logistics. Multiple pieces of analysis describe weapons recovered in Darfur being traced back to the UAE and networks of UAE-registered firms tied to key RSF actors such as Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti) and intermediaries like Mazin Fadlalla, suggesting an organized commercial ecosystem facilitating RSF access to hard currency and materiel [1] [3]. The narrative also frames UAE interests as geopolitical and resource-driven, associating support for the RSF with attempts to secure Sudan’s natural wealth and influence regional transitions [1] [4] [5].
2. Evidence that supports the claim — investigations, sanctions and trade data
A range of investigative and official actions underpin the assertion of UAE links: UN expert panels and independent investigative organizations reported credible evidence of UAE involvement in supplying the RSF, US Treasury sanctions targeted UAE-linked companies and actors connected to the RSF, and NGOs and media investigations traced large volumes of Sudanese gold exports through the UAE to buyers and refineries that may benefit RSF financiers. Data cited indicates the UAE imported roughly 90% of Sudan’s official gold exports in the first half of 2025, and investigative reports document Dubai-based companies implicated in laundering Sudanese gold tied to RSF revenue streams [1] [2] [3] [5].
3. Denials, political positioning and alternative explanations — where the UAE pushes back
The UAE consistently denies direct state involvement, insisting it does not arm or fund warring parties and that its policy seeks a transition back to civilian rule and protection of civilians, while portraying itself as a mediator in the conflict and part of international ceasefire efforts. Emirati officials and the UAE embassy have rejected allegations of state-sponsored arming, and some reporting notes the possibility that private actors or opaque commercial networks operating within Dubai’s financial and trading infrastructure may be the conduit rather than formal government policy [1] [4] [7] [2]. This delineation between state action and private/commercial misuse of UAE territory is a core element of the UAE’s rebuttal.
4. How sanctions, investigations and trade scrutiny have intersected — concrete steps and unresolved loops
Governments and investigators have responded with targeted sanctions, UN expert panel requests, and investigative reporting that together create a mosaic of evidence: US Treasury and OFAC sanctions on companies linked to the RSF and its leaders; Sentry and NGO reports mapping business networks in the UAE; and calls for tougher due diligence on gold supply chains. At the same time, reporting highlights implementation gaps—Swiss and other markets sourcing gold via the UAE, and allegations that sanctions and embargoes have not fully plugged gasps in the trade chain—leaving the RSF with avenues for revenue and procurement despite international pressure [1] [3] [5] [2].
5. What remains contested or unknown — key gaps that demand further scrutiny
Critical uncertainties persist: the exact degree of formal state involvement versus private or illicit actors operating from Dubai, the proportion of RSF funding conclusively traced to UAE-based transactions versus other sources, and the effectiveness of existing sanctions in severing RSF access to funds and weapons remain inadequately quantified. Reports identify individuals and companies but stop short of proving direct ministerial directives from Abu Dhabi or Dubai authorities, leaving open whether the UAE government was complicit, negligent, or simply outmaneuvered by shadow networks leveraging Emirati markets [3] [4] [6].
6. Bottom line and what independent actors should pursue next
Taken together, multi-source investigations, UN expert findings and sanctions actions present substantial evidence that Dubai-based channels and UAE-linked commercial actors have materially benefited or facilitated the RSF, particularly through the gold trade and commercial networks, while the UAE government denies state-level sponsorship and emphasizes mediation. The most productive next steps are targeted forensic audits of commodity flows, expanded sanctions and asset-tracing focused on the named Dubai entities, closer scrutiny of gold refineries and buyers, and a formal cooperation mechanism between UN investigators and UAE authorities to determine whether observed networks reflect state policy or criminal exploitation of Emirati markets [1] [2] [3] [4].