2021 military coup and armed resistance against the Tatmadaw junta
Last update: Feb 9, 2026
Internal conflict with multiple armed actors and sustained civilian impact.
The conflict as process. Each event: context, actors and consequences.
The Sudanese civil war did not begin in April 2023, although that is when the world took notice. Its roots lie in the failed transition that followed the fall of Omar al-Bashir in April 2019, after three decades of dictatorship and mass protests that united civilians and the military against the regime.
What followed was a democratization experiment doomed from the start. The Transitional Sovereign Council, composed of civilians and the military, never resolved the fundamental contradiction: who would control the guns during the democratization process? While civilians from the FFC (Forces for Freedom and Change) tried to build institutions, the generals consolidated economic and military power.
The tension between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary militia commanded by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo "Hemedti", became the axis of the crisis. The RSF, born from Darfur militias and used by Bashir to crush rebellions, had transformed into a parallel army with its own funding (Darfur gold, UAE support) and tribal loyalties distinct from the state.
The tipping point came with the negotiation over integrating the RSF into the regular army. For Burhan, dissolving the RSF meant recovering the state monopoly on force. For Hemedti, integration meant losing autonomy and possibly facing war crimes trials in Darfur. The negotiation became a countdown to war.
On 15 April 2023, fighting erupted simultaneously in Khartoum, Darfur and other cities. What initially seemed a quick coup became a war of attrition. The SAF controls the formal state apparatus (airports, ministries), but the RSF dominates entire neighbourhoods of the capital and the gold trade.
The regionalization of the conflict complicates any solution. Egypt backs the SAF (institutionalism, state control), while the United Arab Emirates maintains financial ties with the RSF (commercial interests, counter-insurgency). The war has become a proxy for influence in the Horn of Africa and control of the Red Sea coast, vital for global trade.
Who holds power, who fights whom. Click to view the dossier.
The humanitarian crisis is not a byproduct — it is a central feature of the conflict.
Resolutions, sanctions, peace processes and ongoing investigations.
Projections for 6–12 months. Triggers, indicators and implications.
Stalemate in military operations International disengagement Regional economic pressures Resistance force splits
Military leadership change ASEAN intervention Major military defeats Economic collapse forcing compromise
Thai-Myanmar border skirmishes Chinese military support increases US/Japan direct intervention Total state collapse
conflictDetail.indicators.subtitle
Percentage of Myanmar territory under Tatmadaw military administration vs resistance control
Military control declining in non-urban areas; losses accelerated after Operation 1027. Urban centers remain fortified.
UN humanitarian worker safety incidents and delivery capacity in conflict zones
Access severely restricted; multiple humanitarian organization suspensions reported. Northern Shan State nearly completely cut off.
Monthly documented civilian deaths from all conflict actors
Documented civilian deaths increased 35% in 2023-2024. Military intensifying aerial bombardment campaigns.
Monthly new refugee registrations in Thailand, Bangladesh, India
Thai border camps at 100% capacity. Bangladesh hosting 1M+ Rohingya already; new Myanmar refugees straining resources.
ASEAN, UN, and third-party diplomatic engagement levels
ASEAN consensus fragile; no breakthrough mediation efforts. China and Russia provide political cover for Tatmadaw.
Myanmar data is compiled from multiple verified sources including ACLED, UNOCHA, UNHCR, ICG reports, and local news source monitoring. Casualty estimates reflect documented data and are conservative, acknowledging that actual figures are likely higher.
Myanmar's civil war represents Southeast Asia's most destabilizing conflict, with implications for regional security, migration flows, and economic stability. Without credible political transition, the fragmented conflict appears destined to persist, deepening a humanitarian catastrophe that has already displaced millions.
International Affairs Watch