Soldiers of the Sudanese army or affiliated forces pose for a picture while pumping their fists at the damaged presidential palace after recapturing the complex from RSF paramilitaries in Khartoum on March 21, 2025. [Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images]
Soldiers of the Sudanese army or affiliated forces pose for a picture while pumping their fists at the damaged presidential palace after recapturing the complex from RSF paramilitaries in Khartoum on March 21, 2025. [Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images]
When the Ottoman Turks laid the Sudan palace’s foundation stone in 1826, it was a symbolic declaration of the empire’s control over Sudan. Initially constructed out of green mud brick, it was later rebuilt in red brick, using the ruins of the Christian Kingdom of Soba – a scene that embodied the succession of civilisations and the struggle for power over this land.
At the fall of the Mahdist state in 1899, Sudan’s Presidential Palace was rebuilt by the British, who remained there until 1956. That year, after serving two years as prime minister, Ismail Al-Azhari became Sudan’s new ruler, declaring Sudan’s independence while hoisting the flag of a “free” Sudan for the first time. However, the palace would not only be a witness to independence; it would also be the scene of coups and bloody events that changed the course of Sudan’s history.
In 2015, the new, modernly designed Republican Palace, funded by China, was inaugurated by the then leader, Omer Al-Bashir, as the new Sudanese presidential headquarters. Less than a decade later, however, the palace was reduced to rubble. Its grand halls transformed into battlefields, where political maps were replaced by assault plans, and meeting rooms became sites of armed clashes.
For the past week before it fell at the hands of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the fighting around the Republican Palace witnessed violent clashes before army units were able to breach the defences through the eastern gate. The battles in Khartoum continued unabated, and the Republican Palace became the scene of the most violent confrontations since the outbreak of the war in April 2023. After nearly two years of fighting, the Sudanese army announced its recapture in a move described as “historic”.
OPINION: As the civil war grinds on, Sudan faces a 39-month extension of military rule
For four days, the fighting around the presidential palace witnessed violent clashes before army units were able to breach the defences through the eastern gate. According to military sources, the attack was carried out according to a well-executed plan that included intense artillery bombardment and ground landings along two main axes: the first, from the back streets, which were under sniper fire, and the second, through a secret old tunnel believed to date back to the British colonial era.
On the final night of the offensive, special forces units infiltrated along these two axes, facing fierce resistance from the RSF, who planted explosives in the passageways to slow the army’s advance. However, as military pressure intensified, the rebel forces withdrew toward the Arab Market in central Khartoum, pursued by army units, who declared full control of the palace and surrounding facilities.
In an official statement, the army confirmed that it had destroyed the remaining force inside the palace and seized weapons and equipment, describing the operation as an “immortal, heroic epic” as military operations continue on various fronts. Immediately after the announcement of the palace’s recapture, social media platforms erupted, with the hashtag “#RepublicanPalace” topping the trending list in Sudan. While some viewed the event as a strategic victory that strengthened the army’s position, others viewed it as merely a phase in a conflict that remains open to numerous possibilities.
OPINION: The RSF parallel government in Sudan is ‘stillborn’ and lacks international or popular support
On pro-army pages, photos and videos circulated showing soldiers celebrating inside the palace amid chants of “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) with phrases such as “The palace has been returned to its owners” and “Victory is coming.” National anthems were also reposted, while some compared the palace in its heyday to its present state following its destruction.
Meanwhile, analysts have warned of a potential escalation in fighting, especially with the withdrawal of the RSF to other strategic locations within the capital. The Republican Palace was not just a seat of government; it witnessed pivotal moments in Sudan’s history as governments succeeded one another and regimes fell within its walls. This was not the first time the palace had been captured and fought over.
In July 1971, the palace was turned into a prison for former President Gaafar Nimeiri during a coup led by Major Hashim Al-Atta before Nimeiri regained power and executed the coup leaders. Over the decades, the palace has remained a centre of political intrigue, with governments falling and regimes changing, reflecting Sudan’s ongoing power struggle. “Today, it’s as if history is repeating itself, but in a more tragic way,” writes Al Arabia, one of the first new outlets at the scene.
“Invading armies no longer come from across the seas, and revolutionaries no longer raise the banner of change. Instead, the conflict is between the sons of one nation in a war that has left nothing but ashes and destruction,” the news outlet reports. Tragically, three journalists from Sudan state television were killed and another injured, along with the death of Emad Al-Din Hassan from the military media.
Although the recapture of the palace represents a strategic victory for the army, it was not without major questions that remain unanswered. Some fear that the RSF may regroup and Sudan may remain stuck in a cycle of conflict with no clear horizon for a solution. Others breathe a sigh of relief and view this victory as a “turning point” in the war against the RSF on the road to peace.
READ: Sudan army says it has control of presidential palace in Khartoum
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
Unless otherwise stated in the article above, this work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. If the image(s) bear our credit, this license also applies to them. What does that mean? For other permissions, please contact us.
Spotted an error on this page? Let us know