10

According to this article (cited by Wikipedia article on the Sudanese civil war):

We literally don’t know how many people have died, possibly to a factor of 10 or 15. The number was mentioned earlier 15 to 30,000. Some think it’s at 150,000. We are now supporting a couple of efforts. To use methodologies to document and get to that so we at least know what kind of consequences we’re looking at here.”

This uncertainty is rather astonishing - indeed, even in Gaza, with the enormous level of destruction and all the propaganda war surrounding it, there is at least agreement on the order of magnitude (Gaza Health Ministry records were recently called in question, due to the lack of the full records for about a third of the reported deaths - but this mainly led to revising the proportion of combatants and non-combatants killed, rather than the overall number.)

12
  • The article does not say anything about adjusting the estimate of the number of non-combatants killed in the Gaza Strip, only women and children, which is not the same in either direction: most men in the Gaza Strip are not combatants (Hamas accounts for under 1/10 of the population, and not all members are combatants), and a small number of women and even a sprinkling of minors are combatants. Overall, though, the first effect is likely to be more important, so I would not expect a higher percentage of men to mean a substantially higher proportion of combatants.
    – Obie 2.0
    Commented May 31 at 14:25
  • @Obie2.0 minors are everyone below 18 - there are likely plenty of combatants among these. Also, most men in Gaza might not be combatants, but this does not directly translate into proportion of combatants among the killed. Finally, you are trying to draw too many conclusions from a secondary source, which itself based on numbers from a source that has been repeatedly accused of being partial in this conflict. And this is not directly related to the Q.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 14:35
  • I primarily am pointing out that the article does not establish any revision of the number of combatants killed, because that data is not available, so it is not accurate to say that it does. As for the mention of minors, it's relevant because the Gaza Health Ministry does not provide an explanation of its age cutoff for children, so it could be as high as 18, the typical cutoff. The vast majority of people under 18 are still not combatants, though. Which is likely true of all the deaths in the Gaza Strip, in my personal opinion.
    – Obie 2.0
    Commented May 31 at 14:42
  • 9
    That they are assumed by Israeli forces to be combatants is the most likely explanation. Any relation with reality is optional.
    – Obie 2.0
    Commented May 31 at 18:42
  • 6
    Is it really necessary to cite so much info about Gaza here? Seems like it takes up much/most of the question's content, despite being only tangentially related. Why not stick mostly to Sudan, maybe with a "... contrasted with Gaza where numbers seem more specific..." Commented Jun 1 at 16:03

4 Answers 4

15

IMHO it's rather common for civil wars in Africa to have a poor counting of victims. Often, one or more combatant sides are not too interested in a detailed accounting, including of civilian casualties. See for another example the recent war[s] in Ethiopia.

In this Sudan conflict, in particular, it looks like neither the gov't nor the RSF are too interested that kind of accounting, e.g.

A health ministry report circulated to aid agencies and seen by Reuters put the death toll in Khartoum State at 234 people as of July 5 [2023]. The report specifies that the data is collected only from civilian hospitals.

But across Khartoum State, which includes the capital and its sister cities Omdurman and Bahri, activist and volunteer groups have recorded at least 580 civilian deaths through July 26 as a result of air strikes, artillery and gunfire.

The disparity in the figures for Khartoum State suggests that the official nationwide death toll, which the health ministry puts at 1,136 people as of July 5, may also be an undercount.

An official in Sudan’s health ministry told Reuters the official figure was “the tip of the iceberg.” That’s because many civilians have died in their neighborhoods or at home – not in hospital – so their deaths wouldn’t have been recorded, he said.

Representatives for the army and RSF did not respond to requests for comment, including on the civilian death toll and the May 7 attack.

If that happens in the capital and large cities, you can imagine how it's in the more remote parts of the country.

It's also hard for me to cut through the conflicting claims of who controls how much of the country, in this war, BTW.

The stuff I said in the beginning about Africa is not limited to wars though. Only 8 countries there have a (reasonably working) registration system for the dead.

All but two countries in Europe - Albania and Monaco - have a universal death registration system, and in Asia, just over half, analysis of UN data shows.

But in Africa it is only Egypt, South Africa, Tunisia, Algeria, Cape Verde, São Tomé and Príncipe, Seychelles and Mauritius that have what are called functioning, compulsory and universal civil registration systems - known as CRVS systems - which record deaths.

enter image description here

So they don't know who and how dies even in normal times.

The main way we know something about deaths in that region is through [random sampling] surveys, e.g. in the CAR (last year, April 2023)

Families described malaria or fever, and diarrhea as the primary reported causes of death with violence accounting for 6 percent of all deaths. Most people expressed that they were desperate for assistance, asking for health care (26.9 percent) and food (25.2 percent). A disturbing 82.3 percent of households reported adults ate ≤ 1 meals per day at the time of interview. Similarly, 72.6 percent of children, who have greater nutritional needs and are at higher risk for malnutrition and its associated morbidities, ate ≤ 1 meals per day at the time of interview.

The survey finds an acute dearth of children under age 3 in a population with low contraceptive use, implying either a recent elevation of infant mortality, a decrease in birth rates due to extreme stress, or both. Corroborating the likelihood of a reduced birth rate, 25.5 percent of known pregnancies resulted in a loss. This is higher than the fraction recorded in neighboring Eastern DRC in 2002 during a period of extreme conflict. These findings align with a 2022 UNICEF report that food insecurity and malnutrition are widespread in CAR and imperil the lives of tens of thousands of children.

The authors write: “CAR is experiencing a severe health emergency, with the highest measured nationwide mortality in the world to our knowledge. UN-published death rate estimates appear to be less than one-fourth of reality. [...]

Not that there's that much agreement between such (CAR surveys), e.g. an older 2020 paper noted that "[a]vailable mortality estimates vary and differ in methodology." (That one also found that violence accounted for 16.7% of deaths there. And that after excluding some areas from the survey due to insecurity.)

I'm not even sure there was survey like that done/possible in Sudan in recent times, due to the widespread fighting and targeting of the aid/int'l workers.

2
  • Small typo/missing word: "So they don't know who and how <many?> dies even in normal times."
    – Frodyne
    Commented Jun 3 at 7:56
  • It turns out there was actually a MSF mortality survey of sorts in Jan 2024, but this was conducted in the refugee camps in the neighboring Chad msf.org/… Nothing in Sudan proper, AFAICT. Commented Jun 3 at 18:20
9

All information from Demographics of Sudan. Note that for current Sudan the estimate of the total population has an uncertainty in the million range. The last proper census happened in 1993 and got to a result of 30 million.

Estimates of Sudan, including the population of South Sudan, ranged from 37 million (United Nations) to 45 million (CIA). Since the secession of South Sudan in July 2011, the current population of Sudan is estimated to be about 46 million.

Meaning nobody has any accurate idea of how many people are currently living in Sudan. Counting people killed in the war accurate to even 1000s of people is well beyond what is currently available in Sudan.

9

To be blunt: No one really knows how many people are being killed in Sudan because no one really cares. It's not that you can't compile information about the conflict. It's that the effort involved is not cost effective for those who would be doing so.

It never is easy to compile accurate information about a civilian population during a war. Particularly when many millions of those civilians are displaced people on the run. Even so, a conflict of this magnitude which according to all counts has left tens of thousands of people dead and many millions of people displaced deserves major attention from the UN, the media, world wide protesters, humanitarian groups etc. Along with that degree of attention would also come contact with those who are involved in the situation and reports would have a practical value in being written etc. But when the conflict is largely being ignored the millions of displaced people and the struggling relief workers (in any capacity that they are working) have more important things to worry about than cooperating and coordinating with each other to compile reports about how many people died in their respective area (which are not all under the same jurisdiction) to present a sum total of deaths to the outside world.

2
  • 10
    I didn’t even know there was a civil war in Sudan till I saw this Politics SE post… Commented May 31 at 18:20
  • 3
    @JonathanReez FWIW, it has been covered by the MSM, although not with terribly frequent updates.
    – ohwilleke
    Commented May 31 at 23:23
2

Sudan is big and poor, and the war there is chaotic with numerous armed groups.

There is nobody with the resources and inclination to count.

6
  • 5
    No that's just a projection.
    – James K
    Commented May 31 at 8:18
  • 4
    Anyhow, your point may be valid, but it needs to be supported by facts - e.g., comparing how poor and chaotic Sudan is in comparison to Gaza. Or discussing the Sudanese equivalent of Gaza ministry of health (which is the mains source of information.) On the other hand, Sudan being big and better accessible, one could expect more independent estimates than in Gaza.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 8:59
  • 2
    Really, you need a citation that Sudan is bigger and poorer than Palestine. Or a count of the number of Israeli armies?
    – James K
    Commented May 31 at 13:35
  • 5
    I can google it - just trying to salvage your answer, which, as is, should have been a comment.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 14:22
  • 2
    Nah, It's an answer. It might not be a very good answer, but its definitely not a comment. It doesn't ask for clarification or improvement of your question. It might not be a very good answer, but then it's not a very good question, since the differences between Gaza and Sudan are pretty obvious, so it looks like you're pushing some angle - I don't know what. And the answer is correct, or a least it has been repeated in more detail four times over. So I'm not going to "salvage" this, I'll let it fester.
    – James K
    Commented Jun 2 at 21:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .