Colombian Mercenaries in Sudan: UN Report Points to UAE Firm
SUDAN — A leaked UN report links Colombian mercenaries in Sudan to a UAE-based security company, according to Middle East Eye. The outlet’s November 6 investigation describes a recruitment network that supplied fighters for the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
However, the UAE rejects allegations of wrongdoing in Sudan.
What the report says about Colombian mercenaries in Sudan
According to Middle East Eye, the confidential update identifies Global Security Services Group (GSSG) as a central company in the deployment network. It describes routes through the UAE, Somalia, eastern Libya and Chad.
The outlet also reports that investigators identified a transit or training role for a maritime police base in Bosaso, Somalia. In Sudan, the Colombians allegedly provided drone, artillery and infantry support during the siege and capture of El Fasher.
These details come from Middle East Eye’s account of the confidential UN Panel of Experts update. POC has not independently reviewed that document.
Public investigations describe a wider operation
Separately, the UN’s Independent International Fact-Finding Mission has documented Colombian recruitment and deployment to Sudan. Its report, A/HRC/63/23, describes a network involving recruiters, transport arrangements and military training.
The mission assessed that the total number of Colombian contractors might approach 2,000. However, estimates varied considerably, and that figure should not be treated as a verified current headcount.
Witnesses described Colombians operating drones, supporting artillery and maintaining advanced weapons. The mission also received information that some recruits did not know their destination would be Sudan. Others reportedly received less pay than their contracts promised. [3]
Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch published its own investigation in May 2026. Researchers used contractor interviews, company documents, satellite imagery and verified photographs and videos to examine the recruitment network. They reported evidence of transit through UAE military facilities before deployment to Sudan. [4]
Recruiters and payment networks face sanctions
U.S. authorities have already targeted people and companies connected to the operation. In December 2025, Treasury sanctioned four individuals and four entities over recruitment for the RSF.
Treasury identified International Services Agency (A4SI) as a key recruiting company. It also described intermediaries that handled contracts and payments, helping obscure the connection between recruiters and the company hiring fighters. [5]
Subsequently, the UN Security Council’s Sudan sanctions committee listed retired Colombian officer Álvaro Andrés Quijano Becerra on April 28, 2026. Its published explanation identifies him as a central organizer of Colombian recruitment and deployment. [6]
In June, Treasury announced further sanctions involving recruitment and procurement networks supporting Sudan’s warring parties. Those measures show that investigators have continued pursuing the people and financial arrangements sustaining the conflict. [7]
The UAE disputes the allegations
The UAE’s denial extends to the named security company. In July, an Emirati spokesperson told Reuters that authorities had investigated GSSG and found no involvement in mercenary activity in Sudan.
The spokesperson also said the company complied with UAE and international law. Separately, Middle East Eye reports that the UAE rejected wrongdoing in correspondence included in the latest confidential update. [2][1]
Why this matters to overseas contractors
For overseas workers, the recruitment accounts reveal a serious gap between some advertised assignments and actual deployments. Human Rights Watch interviewed one contractor who expected infrastructure-security work and said recruiters had not disclosed a Sudan war-zone assignment.
By contrast, another contractor told researchers that recruiters had clearly described the work as participation in a war. Their different accounts caution against assuming that every recruit entered the operation under the same circumstances. [4]
For POC’s audience, the practical issue is transparency throughout the hiring chain. The recruiter, employer, paying company, destination and actual duties all matter when assessing an overseas assignment.