Lies: Parallel Battles to the Khartoum War
Since the outbreak of the Khartoum war between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces in mid-April last year, accurate military and operational information remains elusive. This lack of precision is one of the elements of the psychological warfare faced by both sides. The new media and social networking sites have taken control of the wars media space, and amid the heavy circulation of conflicting and false news and information, professional media platforms have been lost. Military analysts find themselves in confusion, as access to accurate information and genuine news helps provide an analytical view of the situation on the ground.
During the first week of the war, with the absence of true information and the influx of misleading and false news through various media channels, opinions and perspectives regarding the events on the ground varied significantly.
In an interview with the Qatari Al Jazeera channel during the early days of the war, Jordanian military analyst Brigadier Fawaz Aldweiri mentioned that conflicting data and the lack of reliable information on the ground make it impossible to provide an analytical description of the military battles. He pointed out that both sides tend to exaggerate and present contradictory information to bolster their military position.
Political analyst Khalid Mohamed Noor described what is happening as a war of lies, starting with its primary ethnic ideological biases that were manipulated into nationalism. He asserted that this war is built on explicit lies. When one side claims to fight for democracy while the other claims to protect the homeland and constitutional institutions, and with the proliferation of fake social media pages and numerous videos promoting illusory victories for each side, the lack of accurate data from official platforms representing each side individually further complicates the situation.
For example, all news related to the armys victories and advances did not originate from the Sudanese Armed Forces trustworthy page, which would present the truth as it is, according to observations made by many activists. Likewise, most of the news reporting the deaths of Rapid Support Forces members did not come from the Sudanese Armed Forces and were largely proven to be inaccurate or outright lies on the day of their publication or the following day.
This applies equally to the Rapid Support Forces media, aiming to promote false victories to boost morale.
Analysts and media professionals have exposed the parties to the conflict relying on fake pages with substantial social media followings, as well as unscrupulous and unprofessional journalists who have been spreading false news and misleading analyses from the first day of the war, supporting deceptive propaganda.
The President of the Sudanese Journalists Union, Abu Edrees, warned of what he referred to as the parallel war on social media platforms, predicting that it could escalate the ongoing conflict into a full-fledged civil war. He mentioned that the parties supporting the war between the armed forces and the Rapid Support Forces have established media rooms on social media platforms, fueling hate speech, deception, and disdain towards specific social entities, even before the war began.
Abu Edrees expressed concern that the continued activity of these media rooms could expand the scope of the war and turn it into a civil war, disregarding the delicate social structure in Sudan. He pointed out that the current war has witnessed deliberate and unintentional violations of national and international laws that regulate media coverage during conflicts.
He criticized the portrayal and interrogation of civilians, which is a clear violation of international humanitarian law that prohibits such actions. This is in addition to the publication of images of the deceased, which is deemed forbidden by the journalistic charters worldwide and across religions. Abu Edrees highlighted the deliberate manipulation and lack of respect for sensitivities among the ethnicities in Darfur, exemplified in a video of the late Governor of West Darfur.
He affirmed that the media rooms producing content to support a specific political narrative have a clear and organized plan akin to intelligence agencies tactics in spreading chaos.
Abu Edrees also presented several indicators proving that the war on social media platforms is managed in an organized and cunning manner. For instance, Facebook closed 50,000 accounts proven to be affiliated with the Rapid Support Forces and operated externally, while 361,000 active accounts in Sudan interact with the war and exhibit similarities in language and phrasing.
He further noted the significant increase in Twitter activity following the outbreak of the war, with mentions of Sudan exceeding one million after the recent events in Port Sudan. When linking these indicators to a government report indicating that 70% of Sudanese people own smartphones, it becomes evident that we are witnessing a war on social media platforms that will not end with the conclusion of field confrontations. Consequently, addressing this issue requires the establishment of a rational discourse to counter the discourse of war.
