Why the RSF is targeting Khartoum and its airport?

KHARTOUM — The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) on Tuesday morning launched drone strikes on Khartoum International Airport (KIA), just one day after Sudanese authorities announced plans to reopen the facility for the first time since the war began.

The attack, which occurred less than 24 hours before the scheduled resumption of flights, was not an isolated incident. Since its withdrawal from the capital in April 2023, the RSF has repeatedly struck targets far from the frontlines in Darfur and Kordofan, including multiple rounds of drone attacks on Khartoum’s three largest cities — Khartoum, Omdurman, and Bahri — as well as on Port Sudan, the army-controlled administrative capital on the Red Sea.

What appears on the surface to be another strike on a government asset is, in practice, part of a deliberate psychological and political campaign aimed at denying the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) the ability to project control, legitimacy, or a narrative of recovery after more than two years of civil war.

For the RSF, Khartoum is more than a front line. It is the symbolic core of the Sudanese state — the seat of sovereignty and the heart of the national identity. Whoever governs, or prevents governance in Khartoum, defines the story of Sudan itself.

This is why the RSF — which, like the SAF, has been sanctioned by the United States for violations committed during the conflict — continues to strike vital civilian infrastructure in the capital. Each attack reinforces the message that the war is far from over and that no institution tied to the state remains beyond the RSF’s reach.

Undermining “return to normalcy”

The timing of the RSF’s latest attack is as critical as its target. The strike took place only hours after the army-led Civil Aviation Authority announced plans to reopen Khartoum International Airport for the first time since April 2023.

The reopening, scheduled for Wednesday, was intended to mark a symbolic moment — proof that the government had restored enough stability to reconnect the capital with the rest of the country after months of retreat and destruction.

By striking immediately before flight operations could resume, the RSF ensured that the symbol of recovery never materialized. The airport represents far more than infrastructure because it is an emblem of state functionality. Hitting it was meant to demonstrate to the Sudanese public and the international community alike that the war is not over — and that no declaration of progress can change that reality.

The RSF’s message to the military is that even in apparent stability and places the army control, no space is beyond reach. To displaced civilians, it serves as a deterrent — a signal that Khartoum is not yet safe to return to, regardless of official assurances.

But strategically, the attack also underscores the RSF’s broader calculation that the group does not want a return to normalcy unless it is either the architect of that stability or shares in the credit for restoring it.

Any perception of victory by the military or peace achieved under the army’s authority alone would represent a political defeat — one the RSF is determined to prevent, even if it means keeping the capital in perpetual disruption.

The RSF’s targeting of Khartoum International Airport is consistent with its broader campaign of attacks across the capital’s three main cities — Khartoum, Omdurman, and Bahri (Khartoum North).

In recent weeks, RSF drones have hit power stations, military depots, and administrative buildings across these urban centres. Those attacks temporarily plunged large parts of the capital into darkness, underscoring the RSF’s ability to disrupt the most critical nodes of civilian life.

The objective is twofold. First, it demonstrates that RSF reach extends deep into government territory, contradicting SAF claims of regaining full control of the capital. Second, it enforces a strategic stalemate — preventing the SAF from consolidating political authority or conducting even partial reconstruction.

In the RSF’s calculus, a functioning capital equals a functioning government. By contrast, a capital under siege represents a government without legitimacy, one unable to secure even its own command centre.

The airport as a strategic and psychological target

Khartoum International Airport has long been both a strategic node and a national symbol. It connects Sudan to the world, lies within a dense civilian zone, and is directly tied to the army’s image of normalcy.

For decades, it was the site of official ceremonies, international arrivals, and televised visits by state dignitaries. Its closure after April 2023 symbolized the disintegration of state control and reopening it was meant to signal that the army was reclaiming that role.

By bombing its perimeters, the RSF turned that symbolism against the government. Every plume of smoke rising over the runway or around the airport becomes proof that Burhan’s claims of stability are fragile. Every delayed flight becomes a reminder that the RSF still dictates the tempo of war.

The war in Sudan is increasingly less about frontlines and more about legitimacy. The SAF holds whole of northern, central and eastern regions, while the RSF dominates large parts of Darfur and sections of Kordofan. But Khartoum, though partially destroyed, remains the country’s political heartland — and control of its skies, roads, and institutions determines who can claim to govern Sudan.

The airport represents that legitimacy struggle in its purest form. The army needs it open to prove continuity of the state. The RSF needs it closed to show that the state no longer exists.

By continuously striking the airport, the RSF ensures that even in areas the SAF physically occupies, the state remains functionally paralyzed. The result is a kind of political siege — not just of territory, but of perception.