BEIRUT: Clashes between Kurdish fighters and Turkey-backed opposition gunmen in northern Syria left at least 11 fighters dead in some of the most intense fighting in weeks between the two sides, an opposition war monitor and a Kurdish spokesman said Tuesday.
Exchange of fire and shelling between the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and Turkey-backed opposition gunmen who identify as the Syrian National Army have not been uncommon since Turkish troops invaded parts of northern Syria in October of last year.
The Monday night clashes near the town of Ein Issa were triggered by an attack by Turkey-backed gunmen on SDF positions, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an opposition war monitor. The Observatory said Turkey-backed fighters lost 11 gunmen in the battle and an unknown number of SDF fighters were also killed or wounded.
An SDF spokesman who goes by the name of Mervan Qamishlo confirmed the clashes, saying that the group’s fighters were repelling a Turkey-backed attack. He did not comment on how many SDF gunmen were killed.
A spokesman for the Turkey-backed fighters did not respond to requests for comment.
Turkey says Kurdish fighters in Syria are linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, that has led a decades-long insurgency in Turkey’s mainly Kurdish southeast region and is considered a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.
The US-backed SDF played a major role in defeating the Daesh group in Syria that lost its last sliver of land in March last year. The SDF is holding thousands of Daesh militants in jails it runs.
Kurdish and Turkey-backed fighters clash in Syria, 11 killed
Kurdish and Turkey-backed fighters clash in Syria, 11 killed
- Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces fighters were repelling a Turkey-backed attack
Sudan defense minister dismisses ‘intelligence document’ as fabrication after convoy strike
- Gen. Hassan Kabroun tells Arab News claims that army hid weapons in aid convoy are “completely false”
RIYADH: Sudan’s defense minister has firmly denied reports attributed to Sudanese intelligence alleging that a convoy targeted in North Kordofan was secretly transporting weapons under the cover of humanitarian aid.
Gen. Hassan Kabroun described the claims as “false” and an attempt to distract from what he called a militia crime.
The controversy erupted after news reports emerged that a document attributed to Sudan’s General Intelligence Service claimed the convoy struck in Al-Rahad on Friday was not a purely humanitarian mission, but was instead carrying “high-quality weapons and ammunition” destined for Sudanese Armed Forces units operating in the state.
The report further alleged that the convoy had been outwardly classified as humanitarian in order to secure safe passage through conflict zones, and that the Rapid Support Forces had destroyed it after gathering intelligence on its route and cargo.
Kabroun categorically rejected the narrative.
“First of all, we would like to stress the fact that this news is false,” he told Arab News. “Even the headline that talks about the security of the regions, such as Al-Dabbah, is not a headline the army would use.”
He described the document as fabricated and politically motivated, saying it was designed to “cover up the heinous crime they committed.”
The minister affirmed that the area targeted by drones is under full control of the Sudanese Armed Forces and does not require any covert military transport.
“Second, we confirm that the region that was targeted by drones is controlled by the army and very safe,” Kabroun said. “It does not require transporting any military equipment using aid convoys as decoys because it is a safe area controlled by the army, which has significant capabilities to transport humanitarian aid.”
According to the minister, the Sudanese military has both the logistical capacity and secure routes necessary to move equipment openly when needed.
“The army is professional and does not need to deliver anything to Kadugli or Dalang on board aid convoys,” he said. “The road between Dalang and Kadugli is open. The Sudanese forces used that road to enter and take control of the region. The road is open and whenever military trucks need to deliver anything, they can do so without resorting to any form of camouflage.”
Kabroun further rejected any suggestion that the military uses humanitarian operations as cover.
“Aid is transported by dedicated relief vehicles to the areas in need of this assistance,” he said. “Aid is not transported by the army. The army and security apparatus do not interfere with relief efforts at all, and do not even accompany the convoys.”
He stressed that the Sudanese Armed Forces maintains a clear institutional separation between military operations and humanitarian work, particularly amid the country’s crisis.
“These are false claims,” he said. “This fake news wanted to cover up the heinous crime they committed.”
Sudan has been gripped by conflict since April 2023, when fighting broke out between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, plunging the country into what the United Nations has described as one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters.
The latest dispute over the convoy comes amid intensified fighting in South Kordofan, a strategically sensitive region linking central Sudan with the contested areas of Darfur and Blue Nile.
The false report suggested that intelligence monitoring had enabled the RSF to strike what it described as a military convoy disguised as humanitarian aid. But Kabroun dismissed that version outright.
“The intelligence agency is well aware of its duties,” he said. “The Sudanese Army has enough weapons and equipment to use in the areas of operations. These claims are completely false.”
He argued that the narrative being circulated seeks to shift blame for attacks on civilian infrastructure and humanitarian movements.
“This shows that they are trying to cover up the atrocities,” he added, referring to the militia.
Kabroun maintained that the army has regained momentum on multiple fronts and remains fully capable of sustaining its operations without resorting to deception.
“The region is secure, the roads are open, and the army does not need camouflage,” he said. “We are operating professionally and transparently.”
“These claims are completely false,” Kabroun said. “The Sudanese Army does not use humanitarian convoys for military purposes.”
