The EU’s latest measures target senior figures of the Islamic Movement, the dissolved National Congress Party, and leaders of Sudanese military and militia groups.

“As a consequence, the sanctions regime in view of the situation in Sudan will remain in force until October 10, 2026, covering ten individuals and eight entities. Those listed are subject to an EU-wide travel ban, the freezing of assets, and a prohibition on making funds or economic resources available to them, either directly or indirectly,” the EU said.

Analysts say sanctions have been blunted by the use of third parties.

“Originally, the sanctions were introduced in order to hold those responsible accountable and end the conflict. However, given the continuation of the conflict, the sanctions did not stop it,” Dr Jihad Mashamoun from the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies of the University of Exeter told The EastAfrican.

“…those sanctions are not effective in pressuring the ending of support for the RSF in the conflict and…Burhan and his allies are using their position (de facto government) to gain regional and international support to defeat the RSF.”

He was referring to Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, head of the military government, who still enjoys a measure of international legitimacy—addressing the UN General Assembly even as he remains suspended from the African Union.

The EU blamed both SAF and RSF for devastating millions of lives in a war that began in April 2023 as a contest between two generals. Hunger and famine are spreading, health systems have collapsed, and communities have been cut off from aid. Refugee flows into neighbouring countries are raising fears of regional instability.

“The EU cannot stand idle as Sudanese civilians face relentless suffering,” the Council said, calling sanctions one of the few diplomatic tools available to push for accountability.

Since adopting a Sudan sanctions framework in October 2023, Brussels has rolled out four successive rounds — January, June, and December 2024, followed by July 2025 — of measures against SAF- and RSF-linked figures and companies.

Diplomats admit sanctions cannot end the war, but argue they constrain the financial and political space of Sudan’s warring elites.

Sudanese political analyst Mohamed Abdel Hakim said sanctions mirror Western moves but fall short of Sudanese aspirations.

“The price paid by Sudanese people to overthrow the ousted Islamist regime was extremely high, with thousands sacrificing their lives for democratic civilian governance. Yet that dream was crushed by the military establishment – SAF and RSF – working behind the scenes in alliance with the Islamic Movement’s political and security leadership,” he told The EastAfrican.

He argued that “sanctions alone won’t be enough,” urging stronger international legal and diplomatic pressure.

“At this critical juncture, we hope the international community will intensify its diplomatic efforts and deploy its legal mechanisms to pressure these actors to heed the will of the Sudanese people.”

While Western powers deploy sanctions, Sudan’s regional peers—including the African Union—have been reluctant to endorse them, viewing sanctions as ineffective elsewhere and more punitive to civilians.

The EU’s announcement coincided with another failed mediation attempt in Cairo, following earlier collapsed talks in Jeddah and Addis Ababa.

With diplomacy stalled, sanctions remain one of the few levers left, though their effectiveness is contested. Critics say Sudan’s war economy—fuelled by smuggling, regional sponsors and looting—remains resilient.

The EU insists sanctions are not punishment for punishment’s sake but leverage to push for a Sudanese-led, inclusive political process. “Any lasting settlement must come from within Sudan,” the Council said. “But the international community has a responsibility to create the conditions for peace.”