The news is often far from uplifting. When we turn to our preferred sources, we’re met with distressing headlines: hospitals bombed in Kiev or the West Bank, economies contracting, and yet another rise in taxes looming closer to home. Given this constant barrage of grim stories, it’s not surprising that the ongoing Sudanese Civil War has failed to capture the Western public’s attention to the same extent as other conflicts. As a result, many remain unaware of the atrocities unfolding in Eastern Africa.

What is the Sudanese conflict and how did it start?

The civil war began in April of last year, sparked by a vicious power struggle between Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Gen. Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) over control of the country’s civil government. However, this is merely the latest chapter in Sudan’s tragic history, where internal conflict over constitutional disputes and the rule of law has long plagued the nation, making it one of the most impoverished countries in the world. The creation of the breakaway state of South Sudan in 2011 only serves as a testament to the region’s instability, as Sudan once again finds itself engulfed in a war driven by two medieval warlords.

Sub-Saharan Africa is no stranger to internal conflict, with Ethiopia, Mali, and Niger having also experienced civil unrest caused by reckless warlords or religious fanatics attempting to carve out power for themselves. Nor is this the first time that the World Health Organization (WHO) or UNICEF has had to be deployed to this part of the world. What makes this recent bout of fighting so alarming are the staggering statistics. It is estimated that between 150,000 and 300,000 people have been killed due to food deprivation or massacres, while a further 10 million people are thought to be internally displaced. To put that into perspective, that’s 7 million more people displaced than in Ukraine. While Ukrainians are granted refugee status in nearly all neighboring EU states, the same cannot be said for Sudanese refugees, who now make up 60% of the asylum seekers waiting to cross the English Channel at Calais.

Moreover, millions of innocent Sudanese civilians have had their lives torn apart by the greed and corruption of the few. Not only are the leaders fighting for sovereign power, but those funding the war have strayed far from any moral compass. Alkhaleej Bank, a financial institution, is considered the RSF’s main financial backer, while Al-Fakher Advanced Works, a holding company used by the RSF to export gold, and Red Rock Mining, an exploration company, have been key supporters of the SAF, with significant investments in the defense industry. These backers know that if their combatant emerges victorious, they will gain unrestricted access to the country’s hidden gold reserves, adding to the medieval nature of the conflict.

In defense of Western diplomats, there have been attempts to bring the conflict to a halt, with U.S. officials acting as mediators on three separate occasions, most recently in Geneva last August. Meanwhile, aid is being sent to the region, with the UK contributing £89 million to deliver critical humanitarian supplies, alongside sanctions on those directly funding the war. However, this pales in comparison to the billions being sent to Ukraine each month by the U.S., EU, and UK, making it clear where the West’s priorities lie. But who can blame them? Both the SAF and RSF are well-funded, well-armed, and show no signs of yielding to the other. And because they are both led by ruthless warlords, the West doesn’t have a moral or ideological obligation to tip the scales in either side’s favor, nor do Russia or China. It is therefore understandable why issues in Ukraine and the Middle East feel far more pressing. Though, with the region on the brink of famine and migrants flooding into neighboring African countries and Europe, the deadlock must be broken if Sudan is to prevent itself from tearing apart once again.