RSF drone strike kills at least 24 displaced civilians in North Kordofan
Doctors in Sudan say a Rapid Support Forces drone strike on a vehicle carrying displaced families near Er Rahad killed at least 24 people, including eight children.
A drone strike attributed to the Rapid Support Forces killed at least 24 people, including eight children, when it hit a vehicle carrying displaced families near Er Rahad in North Kordofan, Sudan, on 7 February 2026.
CTV News, citing a doctors’ group, reported that the strike hit a vehicle carrying displaced families in central Sudan. The report said at least 24 people were killed and that eight of the dead were children. It also said the attack came a day after a World Food Programme aid convoy was targeted, underscoring the wider pattern of violence around humanitarian movement.
The source package identifies the attackers as a notorious paramilitary group and places the strike in central Sudan, near Er Rahad in North Kordofan. The report does not provide independent confirmation from a government source, but the casualty count and the nature of the target are clearly presented as the doctors’ group’s account.
This matters because attacks on civilian transport and displaced families cut directly against humanitarian protections. Even without a separate official statement in the packet, the verified details are severe enough to stand on their own: a vehicle carrying civilians was struck, children were among the dead and the death toll reached at least 24.
The article should not add claims about motive, command responsibility or the exact type of drone unless another source supports them. The available evidence is already grim enough. It shows how badly Sudan’s conflict continues to threaten those who are trying to move away from danger rather than toward it.
The humanitarian context matters here because the target was not a military convoy but a vehicle carrying displaced families. That does not turn the case into anything less than a battlefield report, but it does explain why the casualty figures are being relayed by a medical network rather than by an official state bulletin.
Sudan’s war has repeatedly exposed civilians to drone and artillery attacks as they try to move between unsafe areas. The source packet does not give a wider battle narrative, so the article should stay anchored to the verified location, the reported attacker and the confirmed number of dead, including children.
The timing also matters because Sudan’s conflict has repeatedly pushed civilians onto roads and into vehicles that are supposed to be safer than the places they left behind. The report does not say whether the families were evacuating, fleeing a battle or moving between temporary shelters, and it would be wrong to guess. Yet the fact they were displaced families underscores the civilian nature of the target.
The source packet does not provide an official RSF response or an army confirmation. It does, however, provide enough to report that children were among the dead and that the attack hit a vehicle carrying civilians near Er Rahad.
The humanitarian sensitivity of the strike means the report should avoid detached language that erases the victims’ status as displaced civilians. At the same time, it should not speculate about the vehicle’s destination or the families’ origin. Those details are not in the source packet.
What is documented is enough: the strike hit a civilian vehicle near Er Rahad, killed at least 24 people and included eight children among the dead.
