Weaponisation of humanitarian aid

Abstract

This dissertation examines whether humanitarian aid in Sudan’s current civil war has been weaponised, focusing on the alleged role of the United Arab Emirates’ humanitarian presence in eastern Chad in facilitating support for the Rapid Support Forces. Using theory-testing process tracing, the study reconstructs a causal mechanism across four phases: humanitarian emplacement, logistical enmeshment, dual-use affordances, and material support. The analysis draws on official statements, UN reporting, investigative journalism, and flight-track evidence to assess competing narratives of humanitarian relief and strategic facilitation. The findings suggest that humanitarian activity in Sudan cannot be understood as neutral or isolated from the conflict environment. Instead, aid operations, logistics, and diplomatic positioning appear to have become increasingly embedded within a wider conflict economy. The dissertation contributes to the literature on humanitarian principles, dual-use infrastructure, and proxy warfare by showing how humanitarian legitimacy can create operational space that may later be used for strategic or military purposes. It also highlights the limits of humanitarian neutrality in fragmented conflict settings and the difficulty of separating civilian relief from conflict-supporting logistics. The study concludes that protecting humanitarian space requires stronger oversight, clearer separation of functions, and greater accountability for external actors involved in indirect forms of intervention.This dissertation examines whether humanitarian aid in Sudan’s current civil war has been weaponised, focusing on the alleged role of the United Arab Emirates’ humanitarian presence in eastern Chad in facilitating support for the Rapid Support Forces. Using theory-testing process tracing, the study reconstructs a causal mechanism across four phases: humanitarian emplacement, logistical enmeshment, dual-use affordances, and material support. The analysis draws on official statements, UN reporting, investigative journalism, and flight-track evidence to assess competing narratives of humanitarian relief and strategic facilitation. The findings suggest that humanitarian activity in Sudan cannot be understood as neutral or isolated from the conflict environment. Instead, aid operations, logistics, and diplomatic positioning appear to have become increasingly embedded within a wider conflict economy. The dissertation contributes to the literature on humanitarian principles, dual-use infrastructure, and proxy warfare by showing how humanitarian legitimacy can create operational space that may later be used for strategic or military purposes. It also highlights the limits of humanitarian neutrality in fragmented conflict settings and the difficulty of separating civilian relief from conflict-supporting logistics. The study concludes that protecting humanitarian space requires stronger oversight, clearer separation of functions, and greater accountability for external actors involved in indirect forms of intervention.