An 18-month siege and mass killings carried out by Sudanese rebels during their seizure of a city in Darfur bore the hallmarks of genocide, UN experts have said. 

The Rapid Support Force paramilitaries are said to have committed atrocities and human rights abuses in el-Fasher during a campaign that started in 2023 and ended with they overran the territory in October 2024.

The conflict also saw Arab militias try to completely destroy non-Arab communities, with more than half the population slaughtered in the bloodbath, according to the independent fact-finding mission.

Mona Rishmawi, one of the authors of the report, wrote: “Starvation, denial of assistance, mass killings, rape, torture and enforced disappearance…leaves only one reasonable inference – these are the hallmarks of genocide”.

Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has called for “urgent action” from the international community, including criminal investigations “to ensure accountability for vile perpetrators, justice for victims, and to break the cycle of bloodshed”.

Rebel commanders “calculated to bring about the physical destruction” of non-Arab areas, in particular the Zaghawa and the Fur communities, according to the report released on Thursday.

UN officials said several thousand civilians were killed when the RSF and fellow paramilitary groups took over el-Fasher, which had been the Sudanese army’s only remaining stronghold in Darfur.

Only 40% of the city’s 260,000 residents were able to flee the assault alive, thousands of whom were wounded, the officials said. The fate of the rest remains unknown.

The report went on to say: “Thousands of persons, particularly the Zaghawa, were killed, raped or disappeared during three days of absolute horror.

“The wanton violations that were perpetrated by the RSF and allied Arab militia in the final offensive on el-Fasher underscore that persistent impunity fuels continued cycles of violence.”

One witness was quoted as saying that he saw bodies thrown into the air, “like a scene out of a horror movie”, according to the report.

Ms Cooper said: “The world is still failing the people of Sudan. When the stories started to emerge about the horrors of el-Fasher it should have been a turning point, but the violence is continuing.

“It is time to listen to the women of Sudan, not the military men who have been prosecuting this war. We need action for justice, accountability and peace.”

Ms Cooper is expected to raise the report at a UN Security Council meeting in New York today.

Sudan was plunged into conflict in mid-April 2023, when long-running tensions between its military and paramilitary leaders erupted in the capital Khartoum and spread to other regions, including Darfur.

Read more from Sky News:
Former South Korean president handed life sentence
How US military is assembling within striking distance of Iran

The war has seen more than 40,000 people killed, according to UN figures, but aid groups say the true number could be many times higher.

The RSF and their allied Arab militias, known as Janjaweed, overran el-Fasher on 26 October and stormed the city.

Widespread atrocities were committed during the offensive that included mass killings and summary executions, sexual violence, torture, and abductions for ransom, according to the UN Human Rights Office.

More than 6,000 people were killed between 25 October and 27 October in the city, the office said.

Advertisement

Share

1,000 days of war in Sudan

Advertisement

Ahead of the assault, the rebels ran riot in the Abu Shouk displacement camp, just outside of the city, and killed at least 300 people over two days, it said.

The group’s commander, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, has previously acknowledged abuses by his forces, but disputed the scale of atrocities.

An international convention known colloquially as the “Genocide Convention” – adopted in 1948 – sets out five criteria to assess whether genocide has taken place.

They include killing members of a group, causing its members serious bodily or mental harm, imposing measures aimed to prevent births in the group, deliberately inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the “physical destruction” of the group, and forcibly transferring its children to another group.

The fact-finding team, which doesn’t have the final say on whether a genocide has been committed, said it found at least three of those five factors were met in the RSF’s actions.

Under the convention, a genocide determination could be made even if only one of the five were met.

The RSF acts in el-Fasher included killing members of a protected ethnic group; causing serious mental and bodily harm; and deliberately inflicting conditions of life to bring about the group’s physical destruction in whole or in part – all key elements of the crime of genocide under international law, according to the fact-finding team.

The fact-finding mission pointed to mass killings, widespread rape, sexual violence, torture and cruel treatment, arbitrary detention, extortion, and enforced disappearances during RSF’s takeover of el-Fasher in late October.

We hope you love the products we recommend! All of them were independently selected by our editors. Just so you know, HuffPost UK may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page if you decide to shop from them. Oh, and FYI – prices are accurate and items in stock as of time of publication.

When I was a teenager, the pinnacle of high street shopping was undeniably Topshop.

I could (and did) while away hours browsing row upon row of stylish shoes and clothes with my pals of a Saturday afternoon.

And when I first experienced the massive flagship Oxford Street branch? Let’s just say I got lost in there, but I didn’t mind in the slightest.

After the pandemic did a major number on already struggling in-person retail, which saw the closure of Topshop’s stores, shopping on the high street just hasn’t looked the same.

But now, 32 John Lewis stores across the nation have given Topshop a high street home once more.

It’s like 2010 all over again – except the clothes are fit for 2026.

From edgy leather jackets to trendy barrel-legged jeans to elegant dresses and more, here are the best bits to shop before they’re gone.

And (unsurprisingly) this latest collection is already going fast…

Bryan Mbeumo has scored 10 goals since joining Manchester United from Brentford and has been praised for his impact at Old Trafford

Bryan Mbeumo’s influence at Manchester United has hugely benefited his teammates, according to Louis Saha. United brought in Mbeumo last summer from Brentford in a transfer worth up to £65million with the possibility of an additional £6million in add-ons.

Since his arrival at United, Mbeumo has netted 10 goals in all competitions, including nine in the Premier League. That performance has helped the Red Devils in rising to fourth position in the Premier League standings, with securing Champions League qualification being the primary objectivefrom now until the end of the campaign.

Mbeumo has delivered some crucial strikes for United in recent weeks following Michael Carrick’s appointment as the club’s interim head coach, with goals in the victories against Manchester City, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur. With Mbeumo making a significant impression during his debut campaign at Old Trafford, former United forward Louis Saha has outlined why such an impact can influence the entire squad.

READ MORE: Man United told to sign ‘two monsters’ as Casemiro replacements identifiedREAD MORE: Marcus Rashford learns Barcelona transfer plan as star gives agent ‘clear instructions’

FOLLOW OUR MAN UTD FB PAGE! Latest United news and more on our dedicated Facebook page

“Mbeumo has definitely had an impact, and this is a player who embodies the confidence, the drive, and the combativity of the team,” Saha told AceOdds.

“Every player has to understand this quickly when signing for a new club. He showed that straight away, but he’s also a quality player. He’s very balanced. When he makes a mistake, he comes back straight away. There’s no second thought.”

“It’s an obligation for forwards to give that effort and tempo because if the forward is lazy, it brings a similar feeling across the team and spreads like a virus. It’s important to have committed players up front who work hard.

“When you have Mbeumo, Cunha, and Bruno Fernandes, who show commitment, it spreads, and you get rewarded.” Saha’s assessment of Mbeumo follows similar glowing praise from his United teammate Matheus Cunha, who also sung the Cameroon international’s praises.

“He’s very intelligent, he’s very clever,” Cunha told Premier League Productions earlier this month. “So he can use his strength very, very good, like going to space, he shoots so well, so good. This is the kind of number nine we need to have.

“Of course, he’s someone that helped us so much and it’s a pleasure to play with him. He’s more than the position that he plays. Being around him in the pitch, we know he can create something special.”

Ensure our latest sport headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

“While speculative, if the US judges that further action is needed to deal with that specific threat, and if again we believe such action is in our national interest and to protect vital UK security interests, then we should grant the use of our bases if and where required, including RAF bases in the UK, and Diego Garcia.”

Persistent concerns about poor behaviour in UK secondary schools have led to the widespread implementation of disciplinary behaviour management strategies. These include the use of isolation rooms, where children are sent to work alone.

In some schools, it may also include zero-tolerance sanction systems such as “Ready to Learn”. This is an approach in which a graduated sanction system is applied for non-compliance: any minor rule-breaking gets a warning, and any further infractions mean going to isolation.

However, a new wave of research is challenging the long-standing dominance of punitive strategies. My ongoing research with colleagues has shed light on the perspectives of young people, school staff and behaviour experts, revealing the need for a critical reassessment of school behaviour management policies and practices.

Our study on behaviour in schools was initiated by members of our Young People’s Advisory Group, which provides a way for young people aged between ten and 18 to contribute to health and care research. The young people raised deep concerns about the impact of disciplinary behaviour management strategies being used in secondary schools.

We systematically reviewed the evidence to investigate the impact of disciplinary strategies on students, and found they may have a negative impact on mental health and wellbeing and behaviour. We then interviewed 15 young people and 17 secondary school staff and experts in behaviour to understand their views and experiences.

The young people we worked with felt that disciplinary behaviour management strategies, particularly isolation use, were ineffective at addressing poor behaviour. They also believed that it had a negative effect on their mental health and wellbeing, as well as their academic and social lives. They described the Ready to Learn approach as harsh, confusing, and inconsistent. One said:

If you had the wrong-coloured socks on or something like that you’d get a warning or a detention. Then that would lead to you getting angry and you’d get an isolation.

Another commented that: “They don’t try to find out why you’ve done it or anything like that. They just put you in isolation. They don’t really care.”

Addressing causes

The young people voiced a preference for disciplinary approaches rooted in relationships and understanding. Approaches that seek to address the causes of behavioural issues, rather than those that rely on sanctions and exclusionary practices. One suggested:

People would go to a room and sit down on a table with everybody, work together to work out what they did wrong in the lesson, how they could be better next time. And not only what and how, but why. Why is this occurring and then that would also create a platform for anyone to seek help and support of any needs that they had as well.

We also talked to school staff. Some described Ready to Learn as beneficial due to its clarity, consistency, and ability to reduce classroom disruption. Its centralised structure, affordability, and simplicity were seen as advantages. However most expressed the desire for a more therapeutic approach alongside Ready to Learn.

One teacher said:

What we’re missing, is a complementary or alternative narrative at whole-school level to RTL [Ready to Learn]. So, the idea of RTL sitting as a structure but alongside therapeutic or trauma-informed, more relational approaches to dealing with behaviour.

Interestingly, both school staff and experts in behaviour agreed on what encourages positive behaviour. They mentioned clarity, consistency, fairness, and – crucially – positive communication and relationships. They described what works: a supportive school culture that is warm and structured with predictable routines and boundaries, and high expectations delivered with empathy and support.

Here, the use of relational practices is key. This approach recognises behaviour as a form of communication, and aims to build relationships with students to help them understand their emotions and behaviour rather than punishing them.

One student described how this could work:

Talking to the student, trying to help them. Even if they’ve got anger issues and they’re being rude all the time, they could have something that’s causing them to be like that. I think that would be more beneficial.

But relational practices are rarely used. “We aren’t trained, we don’t have that expertise,” a deputy headteacher explained. “So even if we had time for it, we can’t necessarily implement it because we don’t know what we’re doing if I’m honest.”

Schools face significant structural and cultural barriers. Government and most school policies encourage disciplinary behaviour management strategies and a focus on academic outcomes. They are embedded in schools and staff fear change and loss of control. Some school staff see their role as to impart knowledge, not provide pastoral care. Most lack training and expertise in relational approaches and schools face resource constraints.

Disciplinary behaviour management strategies offer an illusion of control but are failing to improve behaviour in meaningful and lasting ways. With growing evidence, especially from those directly affected, suggesting that they may be doing more harm than good, a rethink is needed.

This isn’t about going soft on behaviour. It’s about creating compassionate, inclusive schools that are smart about how they view and respond to poor behaviour.

The female driver was arrested while collecting children from school

Police in Co Tyrone arrested a suspected drink driver who was collecting children from school on Thursday afternoon.

Officers responded to a report of the suspected drunk driver and quickly located the vehicle before making an arrest of a female on suspicion of driving whilst unfit through alcohol/drugs, endangering children and for failing to provide a roadside sample.

Once in custody, the driver provided a reading nearly four times the legal limit.

Posting on Facebook, the PSNI said: “This afternoon, Police in Cookstown received a shocking report of a suspected drink driver collecting children from school.

“Officers quickly located the vehicle and arrested the female driver on suspicion of driving whilst unfit through alcohol/drugs, endangering children and for failing to provide a roadside sample.

“Once in custody, the driver provided a reading of 132 — nearly four times the legal limit of 35.

“This is not just irresponsible — it is profoundly reckless and could have had devastating consequences for those children, other road users, and pedestrians.

“Driving under the influence is never acceptable. If you suspect someone is driving while impaired, report it. Your call could save a life.”

Want to see more of the stories you love from Belfast Live? Making us your preferred source on Google means you’ll get more of our exclusives, top stories and must-read content straight away. To add Belfast Live as a preferred source, simply click here

Women are more likely than men to be diagnosed with dementia. While researchers have some idea of the factors that elevate risk, it’s still not entirely clear why this happens. But a recent study suggests that the menopause could play a key role in increased vulnerability to Alzheimer’s disease.

Researchers at the University of Cambridge analysed brain scans from nearly nearly 125,000 women. They found the menopause is associated with measurable reductions in grey matter (brain areas where information is processed and analysed). They also identified volume reductions in brain regions involved in memory, emotion, attention and decision-making.

These changes were also linked to poorer sleep, increased anxiety and depression and slower reaction times. Importantly, the affected regions overlap with those most vulnerable in Alzheimer’s disease (the most common form of dementia).

This does not mean, however, that menopause causes dementia. But it does suggest that menopause may represent a critical neurological transition – one that can influence brain health trajectories for years or even decades afterwards.

These findings have brought the influence of biological sex on brain health into sharper focus. These findings may also bring us closer to understanding why women are not only at greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease, but a range of other neurological conditions – including multiple sclerosis and depression.

Factors affecting women’s dementia risk

Although women face a higher risk of dementia, their brains often show remarkable resilience.

Throughout much of life, women tend to outperform men on certain verbal memory tasks, and often show greater resistance to early cognitive decline.

But this resilience could be a double-edged sword, masking underlying brain changes for longer.

In Alzheimer’s disease, women often show fewer symptoms early on, despite accumulating signs of the disease in the brain. When symptoms do emerge, decline can appear faster and more dramatic – partly because the brain has already been compensating for damage for years.

There are many other crucial social and biological differences between men and women that may explain why brain health outcomes can vary so broadly, as well.

Cognitive reserve, for instance. This is the brain’s ability to adapt and maintain a certain level of function, even when faced with damage (including that caused by dementia and Alzheimer’s). Education, intellectually demanding work, being socially and physically active and lifelong learning all help build cognitive reserve.

Not only is cognitive reserve shaped by biology, it’s also shaped by social realities. For instance, many women have experienced interrupted education, chronic stress or limited access to healthcare. These factors can quietly erode cognitive reserve over time – even while women continue to function at a high level.

At the same time, strong social networks, emotional intelligence and adaptability, qualities often reinforced in women, may enhance resilience and delay the appearance of symptoms.

Another key factor in dementia risk lies in immune function differences between sexes.

Women generally have stronger immune responses than men. While this protects against infections, it can also increase vulnerability to autoimmune conditions (where the immune system becomes overactive). The immune response can particularly become overactive as women age or during periods of hormonal change.

This heightened immune activity extends to the brain. Chronic neuroinflammation, often caused by a dysregulated immune system, is increasingly recognised as a contributor to Alzheimer’s disease, as well as multiple sclerosis and mood disorders. Women’s stronger immune activation may therefore raise risk for certain brain conditions, especially during periods of hormonal instability – such as menopause.

Chromosomes also matter.

Women have two X chromosomes, while men have one X and one Y in most cases. Many immune-related genes are located on the X chromosome. But some of these genes are able to escape the usual process that switches off their activity in women.

This can lead to higher expression of immune system and inflammatory genes – potentially increasing susceptibility to autoimmune and neuroinflammatory disorders.

The menopause link

One of the most important insights from the recent Cambridge study concerns brain metabolism.

The brain is an energy-hungry organ. It primarily uses glucose (sugar) as it’s main source of energy.

Oestrogen plays a significant role in how brain cells use glucose. Oestrogen helps brain cells use glucose efficiently, supporting the energy needed for thinking and memory.

But when oestrogen levels fall during the menopause, the brain may become less efficient at generating energy from glucose. This can create a mild, chronic energy shortfall in vulnerable brain regions. Over time, this metabolic stress may increase susceptibility to processes linked to Alzheimer’s.

This metabolic aspect could also help explain why symptoms such as brain fog, fatigue, mood changes and sleep disruption are common during the menopause.

It also offers a possible biological bridge between menopause and later-life neurological conditions, including Alzheimer’s.

Alzheimer’s and other brain disorders develop under different biological conditions in women and men. Studies on brain health, as well as tests, treatments and prevention strategies, must reflect that reality.

Factors such as hormones, metabolism, lifestyle and immune function not only affect how Alzheimer’s and other brain disorders develop, but also how they interact with and affect each other.

But for decades, research has ignored women, with studies investigating women’s issues being underfunded. Clinical trials on brain health have also failed to acknowledge sex as a potential modifying factor.

Some studies have completely excluded women – with peri- and post-menopausal women particularly overlooked. As a result, many of the treatments available (including those which slow dementia) are developed and prescribed without considering how hormonal changes may alter drug metabolism.

The result is a healthcare system poorly equipped to recognise early brain changes in women or to intervene at the most effective time.

Everything we currently know is pointing towards an important message: women’s brains are complex, adaptive and shaped by forces (such as hormonal transitions throughout the lifespan) that medicine is only beginning to acknowledge. Recognising both the risks women face and the resilience they carry is the first step toward more equitable, effective brain care.

The inaugural meeting of Donald Trump’s board of peace in Washington on February 19 caps a busy week for US diplomacy – though, not necessarily for the country’s professional diplomats. These people have been largely sidelined in the close-knit circle of the US president’s personal envoys, his former real-estate business partner Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Earlier in the week, Witkoff and Kushner attended two separate sets of negotiations in the Swiss city of Geneva. They first sat down for indirect talks with Iran before then leading negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. They then dashed back to Washington to attend the board of peace meeting.

At best, Witkoff and Kushner have a mixed track record of diplomatic success. Kushner was a key mediator in the Abraham accords during Trump’s first term in office. Designed to normalise relations between Israel and other states across the Middle East, the accords have failed to create sustainable momentum for regional peace and stability.

So far, only the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan have established full diplomatic relations with Israel. Saudi Arabia, an influential player in the Middle East, has not followed suit.

Witkoff has been credited with playing a key role in mediating the January 2025 ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the Gaza peace plan later that year. This latter plan, with endorsement from the UN security council, gave rise to Trump’s board of peace.

Both men have also been at the centre of efforts to end Russia’s war against Ukraine. Witkoff has been involved from the start of Trump’s second term, with Kushner joining more recently at the end of 2025.

Yet, neither Kushner’s addition or a greater focus on a parallel track of negotiations between Washington and Moscow focused on the mutual economic opportunities that peace between Russia and Ukraine would create have brought the warring sides closer to a deal.

Taken together, the outsized roles that Witkoff and Kushner are playing in US diplomacy despite their limited success expose a fundamental misunderstanding of peacemaking at the heart of Trump’s approach to international affairs.

Peace deals are generally complex. To get one across the line usually requires mediators and support teams that are deeply knowledgeable of the conflict in which they are mediating and have broad knowledge of how a plethora of issues can be resolved in a technical sense.

Above all, they need to understand what has driven the parties to conflict and what might induce them to cooperate. While material incentives such as the promise of economic development in exchange for peace are important, warring parties often also have symbolic and psychological needs. These also need to be addressed to ensure the parties sign on the dotted line.

Having just two people with little prior experience of diplomacy and almost no expertise on either of the two conflicts they are currently mediating simultaneously is a recipe for failure. It is likely to lead to a deal being pushed that is simply unattainable in the short term because at least one party will not sign.

And if a deal is, against the odds, agreed because of high pressure on one or both sides, it is likely to be unsustainable in the long term as at least one of the parties will probably defect and violence will resume. This is particularly likely if a deal lacks sufficient guarantees, which lowers the threshold for defection for parties who are not negotiating in good faith.

Ukraine peace negotiations

It is easy to see how such calculations apply in the context of the war against Ukraine. The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has repeatedly made it clear that the Kremlin’s demands – especially Ukrainian withdrawal from the territory in the east it has successfully defended against Russia’s aggression – are not something he will agree to.

Even if he did, such a deal would almost certainly be rejected in a referendum. It will be psychologically close to impossible for Ukraine and Ukrainians to accept the humiliation of giving up something they have not lost, to reward Putin’s aggression and to be sold down the river by Trump in his pursuit of an economic side-deal with his Russian counterpart.

Similarly, it is easy to see that Russia is not negotiating in good faith. Moscow is presenting Kyiv with an ultimatum while destroying as much as possible of the country, both to weaken Ukraine’s will to resist and to undermine its future recovery. Add to that Russian resistance to credible security guarantees and the true intent of Russia’s negotiation strategy is not to achieve sustainable peace but to prepare for the next war.

If and when negotiations on Iran or Ukraine break down or the agreements they might achieve collapse, there will also need to be supporting frameworks in place that can manage the consequences. Trump’s board of peace, which looks like a privatised version of the UN, is unsuitable for such a task.

Not only does it lack the legitimacy the UN has. There is also no indication that its members – be they the countries attending the inaugural meeting or the people serving at Trump’s pleasure in its executive structures – have the intent or capacity to take any actual peace-making role.

The board’s membership is, numerically at least, far below Trump’s aspirations. Only 24 of the 60 or so invitations sent out have been accepted, with traditional US allies in Europe and the G7 absent from the group. Among the attendees at the Washington meeting are the likes of Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Egypt and even Belarus, a country sanctioned by the US and Europe for its support of Russia’s campaign in Ukraine.

Trump’s board of peace may be able to establish a free economic zone here or there and generate some real-estate development. But much of that will be done to benefit its members’ wallets or egos – or both.