The Establishment Forces Confront the Black Media War
In the midst of Sudan’s turbulent and conflict-ridden landscape, the battle is no longer confined to the military front. It has expanded into the realms of media and psychological influence. The latest chapter of this war has been marked by rumors circulating that the Sudanese army is paying money to certain leaders of the Establishment Forces in an attempt to buy their loyalty and foment internal divisions. Although these claims may appear at first glance to be idle talk, they in fact reveal a striking shift in the tools of conflict in Sudan, moving from direct combat to a war of information and psychological manipulation.
A closer look at these rumors reveals their underlying purpose: to undermine internal cohesion within the forces by driving a wedge between leaders and soldiers, and to sow widespread distrust among citizens toward this emerging power. This is not the first time political or military adversaries have resorted to such methods. Rumors have become a weapon for those unable to secure a direct victory on the battlefield, serving as a substitute strategy for the weak and the frustrated.
But why target the Establishment Forces specifically? The answer lies in their current position within the political and military arena. Despite being a relatively new entity, they have managed to gain a measure of popular legitimacy by presenting themselves as an independent national force, guided by integrity and free of narrow deals or partisan interests. Such a reputation makes any attempt to tarnish their image a direct threat to the authority of traditional military structures, which seek to dominate the field and impose their narrative on society.
What stands out is the method used by the army to propagate these rumors. An analysis of the content circulated through pro-army media outlets and social media accounts reveals a consistent pattern: fabricating news stories, exaggerating isolated incidents, repeating accusations, and systematically portraying the Establishment Forces as corrupt or susceptible to bribery. These tactics reflect the bankruptcy of the military discourse, replacing battlefield performance with psychological pressure and black propaganda—clear indicators of weakness and failure in managing the actual conflict.
Yet can such rumors truly affect the reality of the Establishment Forces? Evidence suggests their impact is limited. Public trust is built on concrete achievements and genuine sacrifices, not on fabricated stories. While rumors may generate temporary confusion, they quickly dissipate when confronted with tangible proof. A force that fulfills its duty with honor and integrity strengthens its legitimacy, rendering attempts at defamation ineffective.
In this regard, the role of independent media and citizens is indispensable. Exposing how false news is manufactured and unveiling the mechanisms of disinformation enable the public to discern truth from falsehood and resist psychological offensives. At the same time, the Establishment Forces themselves must safeguard the transparency of their leadership and maintain discipline within their ranks, ensuring a robust internal defense against infiltration or exploitation.
Ultimately, this campaign underscores the army’s current predicament: its inability to achieve decisive results on the ground compels it to resort to psychological warfare, a sign of fragility and lack of moral legitimacy in the eyes of the people. By contrast, the Establishment Forces, drawing on the sacrifices of their members and the awareness of the Sudanese public, demonstrate that genuine trust is not forged through rumor but through action, and that those who stake their credibility on lies gain only a fleeting respite, while those who stand by truth and sacrifice secure the future.
