Sudanese Army Secretly Developed Chlorine Weapons, Intelligence Reveals
A New York Times investigation based on Middle Eastern intelligence files reveals that the Sudanese army manufactured chlorine-based munitions in 2024 to fight the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
The Sudanese military has previously denied US accusations of using chemical weapons in the country's devastating civil war. While these allegations led to US sanctions against Sudan and its army chief, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, Washington had never publicly presented concrete evidence.
Now, a joint investigation by The New York Times, co-authored by journalist Ronen Bergman and based on an intelligence dossier from a Middle Eastern agency, reinforces these accusations. The report details how the Sudanese army developed and produced chemical weapons for about six months in 2024.
Secret Unit and Intercepted Data
Photos, videos, documents, and communications intercepted by the intelligence agency describe a secret Sudanese military unit that manufactured chlorine-based munitions for use against the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia fighting for control of the country.
The gathered documents contain bomb blueprints and details of attempts to conceal the project after its discovery by the United States. Additionally, suspicions have arisen that some of the chlorine used to manufacture the bombs was diverted from a civilian water purification facility that received the chemicals from international aid groups.
A significant portion of the intelligence dossier—nearly 150 documents, photos, videos, and voice messages, alongside thousands of text messages—reportedly originated from the mobile phones of senior Sudanese officers.
Sanctions and Diplomatic Friction
Pressure to uncover details of Sudan's chemical program comes primarily from the United States, which announced a second round of chemical weapons-related sanctions last June. This is part of a broader diplomatic effort to force the Sudanese army to agree to a ceasefire.
The Sudanese military has reacted with opposition to the American moves, stating that it does not trust the United States to act as an objective mediator in the conflict.
