The Sudanese army is the legitimate authority against the RSF

Sudan's civil war is the subject of this position, which holds that the national army is the legitimate authority defending the state against the RSF. Its advocates describe the army as the holder of constitutional authority and the RSF as a paramilitary in armed rebellion, and they frame the army's operations as counter-insurgency in defence of territorial integrity.

The position appears in the dispute over the Sudan civil war, where eight outlets voice it, among them outlets from the Gulf and Arab states. In recent events Egypt's president said Sudan's security is a red line Egypt will not allow to be crossed.

The material names no competing position. The point of parting lies with accounts that treat the war as a catastrophe in which both sides bear blame. Recent events carry that argument: the United States refused a visa to army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan for the UN General Assembly, reportedly tying it to a ceasefire plan; a report cites evidence of chemical weapons use by the army; and a rights group said an army drone strike killed at least 35 people at a court session in an RSF-held area of Darfur.