Christians in Sudan are daily facing hunger, misery and terror. The new Open Doors World Watch List for 2026, which ranks the worst countries in the world for the persecution of Christians, placed the country at No. 4, up one place from last year’s report. 

There are an estimated 2 million Christians in the conflict-ridden northeastern African country. Sudan’s civil war has raged past the 1,000- day milestone with 150,000 people reported to have been killed and more than 13 million displaced. Christians have lived in Sudan since the late first century.

Many of Sudan’s Christians live in the Nuba Mountains, part of the Kordofan region. Rafat Samir, general secretary of the Sudan Evangelical Alliance, told Fox News Digital that the ‘Nuba Mountains now, where the majority of our church members are  coming from, is under siege and  bombing every day for the last six months or seven months. Last week, after Christmas, they bombed our church, hospital and school.’

Adding to the misery, a report by MEMRI, citing Christian Daily international, said 11 Sudanese Christians were killed, as they took part in a procession to their church for a religious celebration on Christmas Day by a drone operated by the government’s Sudanese Armed Forces. 18 others were injured in the attack. MEMRI reported the SAF are backed by the Muslim Brotherhood.

A State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital, ‘Since the April 2023 outbreak of conflict in Sudan, we have witnessed significant backsliding in Sudan’s overall respect for fundamental freedoms, including religious freedom. This backsliding especially impacts Sudan’s oppressed ethnic and religious populations, including Christians.’ 

In a Fox News Digital report last year, Christians were said to be eating grass to survive. Samir says the position is even more bleak in 2026: ‘even the grass is gone now.’

‘The conflict is accelerating the erasure of ancient Christian communities and sacred heritage,’ Mariam Wahba, research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), told Fox News Digital. ‘These losses will be far harder to reverse than the rebuilding of roads or ministries once the guns fall silent,’ she said.

Ideologically, Sudan’s Christians face a hostile future, Samir of the Evangelical Alliance said. ‘Both sides in the civil conflict are daughters of the Islamist movement in Sudan, and the Islamic ideology of both of them is to not have tolerance for others. They consider everyone different from them is against them. The Christian is considered their enemy as part of their religious ideology, and opposing them their religious duty.’

He continued, ‘So whoever does something to harm Christians is considered favorable to the law or to Allah.’ Samir went on to say, ‘the country is getting back to the dark ages.’

Repeated and continuing attempts at getting the government’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the opposing militia, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), to reach a ceasefire have failed. Both sides admit they are still fighting and, it’s clear, killing civilians with sustained energy, particularly in the central Sudanese region of Kordofan, home to many Christians.

‘The United States is committed to ending the horrific conflict in Sudan,’ a State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital, adding, ‘Under President Trump’s leadership, we are working with our allies and others to facilitate a humanitarian truce and bring an end to external military support to the parties which is fueling the violence. President Trump wants peace in Sudan.’     

The spokesperson continued, ‘The suffering of civilians has reached catastrophic levels, with millions lacking food, water and medical care. Every day of continued fighting costs more innocent lives. The war in Sudan is an enduring threat to regional stability.’

The U.N. says fighting is increasing in Kordofan, with U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk telling reporters in Port Sudan on Jan. 18, ‘I am very worried that the atrocity crimes committed during and after the takeover of El Fasher are at grave risk of repeating themselves in the Kordofan region, where the conflict has been rapidly escalating since late October.’

‘The Kordofan states are extremely volatile,’ he continued, ‘with relentless military engagements, heavy shelling, drone bombardments and airstrikes causing widespread destruction and collapse of essential services.’

Wahba said that ‘while the United States remains kinetically active across neighboring theaters, it is unlikely to wade directly into Sudan’s civil war.’

‘President Trump’, Wahba added, ‘has signaled a clear desire to see the conflict resolved —  an objective echoed by both Egypt and Saudi Arabia — but translating that consensus into outcomes on the ground has proven far more difficult than the rhetoric suggests.’

‘For now,’ Wahba continued, ‘U.S. policy is centered on convening regional stakeholders and pressing for alignment among them, while prioritizing humanitarian corridors, aid delivery and coordination with partners willing to host talks. Washington is acting as a facilitator, not an enforcer.’

‘This posture reflects both constraint and caution. Sudan presents few reliable leverage points, no unified opposition partner, and (there’s) little appetite in Congress or the White House for another open-ended entanglement in a fragmented civil war. The result is a policy that remains fluid and reactive, and is shaped less by strategy than by crisis management,’ she said.

Despite everything, the Sudan Evangelical Alliance’s Samir has hope, ‘The Holy Spirit is moving and God’s hand is working in our country. I can tell you through this evil, this darkness, the light of love of our God is lighting in many hearts. The devil is stealing people to death every day. We pray that let us Christians live for one day more, for one day more to proclaim Jesus’s message.’

The horrific regime slaughter in Iran and President Trump’s aggressive campaign to acquire Greenland have resulted in the neglect of a major case now underway at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The ICJ last week began hearings brought by Gambia against Myanmar alleging genocide against the Rohingya people—about 1.4 million of whom live in Myanmar. Several other states have intervened in support of Gambia, which has presented the court with evidence it contends proves that Myanmar’s military forces committed a genocide against the Rohingya population. Myanmar vehemently denies the allegation.

While this case does not concern Israel directly, the ICJ’s determinations may have major ramifications for the case Israel is now defending at the tribunal against South Africa.

This is especially true since one of the judges hand-picked by Gambia to sit on its ICJ panel is South African national Navi Pillay. That would be the same Navi Pillay who recently rushed to publish a report accusing Israel of genocide before retiring as head of the UN Human Rights Council commission of inquiry—a panel widely criticized for its flagrant institutional bias against Israel and the anti-Semitic remarks of its members.

In reality, South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel is riddled with flaws. It is also pushing to redefine a term that been held sacrosanct since the end of the World War II.

The term ‘genocide’ was coined by Raphael Lemkin, a Holocaust survivor who in 1944 strived for its incorporation into modern international law. That occurred in 1948 via the UN Genocide Convention.

The prohibition on genocide is considered a jus cogens norm—that is, a non-derogable rule accepted by all of the first-world community with no exceptions. The definition of ‘genocide’ requires no law degree to understand, and it should never, ever be politicized.

For a genocide to take place under Geneva, there must be acts committed ‘with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.’ The phrase ‘intent’ here is of paramount importance.

South Africa’s pending case before the ICJ alleges Israeli intent to destroy the Palestinian-Arab population of Gaza. Israel, by contrast, (correctly) maintains that its recent actions in Gaza have been a just and proper military response to the war of annihilationist jihad and unspeakable atrocities launched against it by the Hamas terrorist organization on Oct. 7, 2023.

Israel’s ‘intent’ is to free Gaza from Hamas, to return hostages abducted and held by Hamas, and to ensure Hamas has no future role in Gaza and cannot undertake another October 7-style massacre. It repeatedly offered to end the war if Hamas laid down its arms and released all hostages.

Hamas, on the other hand, has shown a complete disregard for human life and has openly stated that its sacrifice of Gazan civilians is a cynical strategic necessity to turn public opinion against Israel. It has for years embedded military infrastructure within Gazan civilian infrastructure—schools, hospitals, UN facilities, mosques, and children’s bedrooms. Israel has waged a defensive campaign in one of the most complex operational environments of any modern war.

At the same time, it has worked with states and NGOs to allow and facilitate extensive amounts of humanitarian aid, rebuilt water supplies, coordinated the vaccination of young Gazans against polio, and helped coordinate and approve the evacuation of those in need of urgent medical care.

Israel repeatedly provides advanced warnings of impending military strikes and has held off strikes where intelligence of nearby civilians has come to light. For a fighting party to so often relinquish the element of surprise to reduce harm to the local civilian population of its enemy is extraordinary.

None of this constitutes a ‘genocide’—and clearly shows the lack of any intent by Israel to destroy the local Palestinian-Arab population in Gaza.

Nonetheless, since South Africa brought its case before the ICJ, numerous groups and states have leapt at the opportunity to join in on the anti-Israel campaign. This has ranged from tendentious so-called online genocide scholars to anti-Semitic mobs to deeply politicized NGOs. Amnesty International, for instance, shamelessly waited more than two years before publishing a report focusing on Hamas’ crimes on Oct. 7, while straining to remind readers of its slanderous accusation of genocide made against Israel a year prior.

Together, they have all been involved in a campaign to redefine the term ‘genocide’ to suit their narrative—all while ignoring the reality of Hamas’ own Nazi-esque barbarism.

The politically motivated efforts to undermine the concept should be of grave concern to us all. If successful, it will result in the ICJ’s further self-discrediting as an institution of political point scoring, rather than meaningful justice.

Israel has legitimately responded to genocidal attacks by a terrorist organization that has repeatedly called for its entire annihilation and the murder of all global Jewry—something it broadcast live to the world on Oct. 7, 2023.

The term ‘genocide’ is one too important to be cheapened. Those pushing for its redefinition must be stopped in their tracks.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo both issued dire warnings about the pressing need to protect the endangered Syrian Kurdish population under attack by government forces in the war-torn nation.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who earlier this month ordered his army, which reportedly has a large jihadist element in it, to conquer territory controlled for more than a decade by the U.S.-allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF.)

Writing on the social media platform X on, Graham declared, ‘There is strong and growing bipartisan interest in the U.S. Senate regarding the deteriorating situation in Syria. There is strong consensus that we must protect the Kurds who were there for us in destroying the ISIS caliphate, as well as many other groups.’

Pompeo responded to Graham’s post, stating, ‘Turning our backs on our Kurdish allies would be a moral and strategic disaster.’

The Trump administration is facing criticism from its long-standing ally, the Syrian Kurds, who played a crucial role in the defeat of the Islamic State in the heartland of the Middle East, following a U.S. government announcement on social media that seemed to hint that the partnership had ended this past week with the Kurdish-run SDF in northern Syria.

The SDF formed as a bulwark against the rapid spread of the Islamic State’s terrorist movement in 2013. ISIS created a caliphate covering significant territory in Syria and Iraq. Al-Sharaa was a former member of the Islamic State and al Qaeda.

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department regarding U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, who also serves as the Special Envoy for Syria, for a response to his recent statement on X wrote that indicated the U.S. partnership with the SDF was over.

Barrack wrote, ‘The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), led by Kurds, proved the most effective ground partner in defeating ISIS’s territorial caliphate by 2019, detaining thousands of ISIS fighters and family members in prisons and camps like al-Hol and al-Shaddadi. At that time, there was no functioning central Syrian state to partner with — the Assad regime was weakened, contested, and not a viable partner against ISIS due to its alliances with Iran and Russia.’

He added, ‘Today, the situation has fundamentally changed. Syria now has an acknowledged central government that has joined the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS (as its 90th member in late 2025), signaling a westward pivot and cooperation with the U.S. on counterterrorism.’

Iham Ahmed, a prominent Syrian Kurdish politician, told Fox News Digital that, ‘We really wished to see a firm position from the U.S. The Kurdish people are at the risk of extermination. The U.S. does not give any solid or tangible guarantees.’

Ahmed cast doubt on statements like Barrack’s, warning the ‘Syrian army is still consisting of radical factions that no one can trust. Alawites, Christians, Sunnis and Druze cannot trust these factions. We could face massacres, which happened in other Syrian cities.’

When asked by Fox News Digital if the SDF wants Israel to intervene to aid the Kurds as it did to help the Syrian Druze and other minorities last year, Ahmed said, ‘Whoever wants to help us should do so – today is the day.’ She said that ‘the Islamic State is showing itself in the image of an official army. Everyone is threatened now.’

She urged a ‘special status for the Kurdish region’ in northeastern Syria.

Ahmed accused the Erdoğan government of nefarious involvement. ‘Turkey stands behind the attacks on our region. Turkish intelligence and small groups are leading attacks. Statements from Turkey are encouraging the extermination of our people,’ she claimed.

Fox News Digital sent a press query to the Turkish embassy spokesman in Washington D.C.

The influential president of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins, wrote on X that, ‘Sen. Graham is right. I’ve been discussing the situation in NE Syria with Republican House leaders.  It is not in America’s interest for Islamist forces to seize territory once governed by trusted U.S. allies who protected minorities and advanced religious freedom. Yet this is happening as Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa’s forces move into northeast Syria, displacing the Syrian Democratic Forces — our partners in the fight against ISIS, who lost thousands of fighters, guarded U.S. bases, and detained ISIS prisoners.’

He continued, ‘Before we place trust in al-Sharaa, a former al Qaeda insurgent who fought U.S. forces in Iraq and was held at Abu Ghraib, he has to show he is trustworthy.  So far, he is failing the test.’

Sinam Mohamad, the representative of the Syrian Democratic Council to the U.S., had harsh words for the administration, telling Fox News Digital, ‘American officials continue to describe the SDF as a reliable partner in that narrow mission. Washington avoids framing the relationship as a political alliance. The U.S. never intended a long-term political commitment to the Syrian Kurds. It was a military partnership without political guarantees. From Washington’s view, that’s consistency. From the Kurdish view, that’s betrayal.’

She added there has been an announcement of a 15-day extension of a ceasefire, ‘But both the SDF and outside observers noted continued [Syrian] government troop buildups near Kurdish-held areas, signaling that conflict could resume.’ She added, ‘The Kurds want to have peace and stability through negotiations.’

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo both issued dire warnings about the pressing need to protect the endangered Syrian Kurdish population under attack by government forces in the war-torn nation.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who earlier this month ordered his army, which reportedly has a large jihadist element, to conquer territory controlled for more than a decade by the U.S.-allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF.)

Writing on the social media platform X, Graham declared, ‘There is strong and growing bipartisan interest in the U.S. Senate regarding the deteriorating situation in Syria. There is strong consensus that we must protect the Kurds who were there for us in destroying the ISIS caliphate, as well as many other groups.’

Pompeo responded to Graham’s post, stating, ‘Turning our backs on our Kurdish allies would be a moral and strategic disaster.’

The Trump administration is facing criticism from its long-standing ally, the Syrian Kurds, who played a crucial role in the defeat of the Islamic State in the heartland of the Middle East after a U.S. government announcement on social media that seemed to hint that the partnership had ended this past week with the Kurdish-run SDF in northern Syria.

The SDF formed as a bulwark against the rapid spread of the Islamic State’s terrorist movement in 2013. ISIS created a caliphate covering significant territory in Syria and Iraq. Al-Sharaa was a former member of the Islamic State and al Qaeda.

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department regarding U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack, who also serves as the special envoy for Syria, for a response to his recent statement on X that indicated the U.S. partnership with the SDF was over.

Barrack wrote, ‘The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), led by Kurds, proved the most effective ground partner in defeating ISIS’s territorial caliphate by 2019, detaining thousands of ISIS fighters and family members in prisons and camps like al-Hol and al-Shaddadi. At that time, there was no functioning central Syrian state to partner with — the Assad regime was weakened, contested, and not a viable partner against ISIS due to its alliances with Iran and Russia.

‘Today, the situation has fundamentally changed. Syria now has an acknowledged central government that has joined the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS (as its 90th member in late 2025), signaling a westward pivot and cooperation with the U.S. on counterterrorism.’

Iham Ahmed, a prominent Syrian Kurdish politician, told Fox News Digital, ‘We really wished to see a firm position from the U.S. The Kurdish people are at the risk of extermination. The U.S. does not give any solid or tangible guarantees.’

Ahmed cast doubt on statements like Barrack’s, warning the ‘Syrian army is still consisting of radical factions that no one can trust. Alawites, Christians, Sunnis and Druze cannot trust these factions. We could face massacres, which happened in other Syrian cities.’

When asked by Fox News Digital if the SDF wants Israel to intervene to aid the Kurds as it did to help the Syrian Druze and other minorities last year, Ahmed said, ‘Whoever wants to help us should do so. Today is the day.’ She said ‘the Islamic State is showing itself in the image of an official army. Everyone is threatened now.’

She urged a ‘special status for the Kurdish region’ in northeastern Syria.

Ahmed accused the Erdoğan government of nefarious involvement. 

‘Turkey stands behind the attacks on our region. Turkish intelligence and small groups are leading attacks. Statements from Turkey are encouraging the extermination of our people,’ she claimed.

Fox News Digital sent a press query to the Turkish embassy spokesman in Washington D.C.

The influential president of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins, wrote on X, ‘Sen. Graham is right. I’ve been discussing the situation in NE Syria with Republican House leaders.  It is not in America’s interest for Islamist forces to seize territory once governed by trusted U.S. allies who protected minorities and advanced religious freedom. 

‘Yet this is happening as Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa’s forces move into northeast Syria, displacing the Syrian Democratic Forces — our partners in the fight against ISIS, who lost thousands of fighters, guarded U.S. bases, and detained ISIS prisoners.

‘Before we place trust in al-Sharaa, a former al Qaeda insurgent who fought U.S. forces in Iraq and was held at Abu Ghraib, he has to show he is trustworthy.  So far, he is failing the test.’

Sinam Mohamad, the representative of the Syrian Democratic Council to the U.S., had harsh words for the administration, telling Fox News Digital, ‘American officials continue to describe the SDF as a reliable partner in that narrow mission. Washington avoids framing the relationship as a political alliance. The U.S. never intended a long-term political commitment to the Syrian Kurds. It was a military partnership without political guarantees. From Washington’s view, that’s consistency. From the Kurdish view, that’s betrayal.’

She added there has been an announcement of a 15-day extension of a ceasefire.

‘But both the SDF and outside observers noted continued [Syrian] government troop buildups near Kurdish-held areas, signaling that conflict could resume. The Kurds want to have peace and stability through negotiations.’

Senate Democrats are ready to break a fragile truce that would avert a partial government shutdown after a Minneapolis man was fatally shot by a border patrol agent on Saturday. 

Congressional Democrats were already leery of backing funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the wake of the agency’s presence in Minnesota and beyond, but the shooting of 37-year-old Alex Pretti during an immigration enforcement operation has shattered what little unity they had on the bill. 

Now, Senate Democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., plan to vote against the legislation, which is currently included in a broader funding package along with five other spending bills. 

Schumer, in a statement on Saturday, said that Democrats tried to get ‘common sense reforms’ in the DHS funding bill, but charged that ‘because of Republicans’ refusal to stand up to President Trump, the DHS bill is woefully inadequate to rein in the abuses’ of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

 ‘I will vote no,’ Schumer said. ‘Senate Democrats will not provide the votes to proceed to the appropriations bill if the DHS funding bill is included.’

Schumer’s play call serves as a blow to Senate Republicans, who worked with their colleagues across the aisle to find compromises in the DHS bill, in particular. It also comes as the deadline to fund the government is rapidly approaching on Friday, Jan. 30. Further complicating matters is the arctic storm ripping across the country, which has already forced the upper chamber to cancel votes on Monday. 

A senior Senate aide told Fox News Digital that Senate Democrats had been for weeks saying that they weren’t interested in shutting the government down again, and had praised the bipartisan nature of the government funding process up until Saturday.

 ‘These bills were negotiated with Dems — they agreed to what’s in them,’ they said.

The agency would be fully funded in the current proposal with several restrictions and reporting requirements that if not met, would act as triggers to turn off certain cash flows. 

Ripping the bill from the current six-bill funding package would cause a domino effect of headaches in Congress, given that any changes to the package would have to go through the House.

The lower chamber is gone until Feb. 2, making the likelihood of a partial shutdown much higher. 

Before the shooting, a handful of Senate Democrats had already made their opposition to the legislation known, including senators Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Tim Kaine, D-Va.

Kaine, notably, crossed the aisle last year to join a cohort of Senate Democratic caucus members to reopen the government after the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

He was not the only member of that group of eight to voice opposition — senators Catherine Cortez Masto, D-N.V., and Jacky Rosen, D-N.M., both came out against the DHS bill’s inclusion in the broader package on Saturday. 

‘My personal guiding principle has always been ‘agree where you can and fight where you must,’ Rosen said in a statement. ‘And I believe this is a time when we must fight back.’

Meanwhile, House lawmakers are on a week-long recess after passing their latest spending package in two chunks — one standalone vote on DHS funding and another wrapping together funding legislation for the departments of War, Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development — this past Thursday.

A provision was added to the legislation before it passed the House that would combine the bills into one large package for the Senate to consider at once. It was then expected to be paired with other bills the Senate has not yet considered but which passed the House this month.

Changing that ahead of the Jan. 30 shutdown deadline would mean House lawmakers must return to Washington early to go through multiple procedural hurdles and another vote on the legislation — something House GOP leaders are ruling out, at least for now.

‘We passed all 12 bills over to the Senate, and they still have six in their possession that they need to pass to the president,’ a House GOP leadership source told Fox News Digital on Saturday evening, referring to the lower chamber completing its portion of Congress’ annual appropriations process. ‘We have no plan to come back next week.’

Even if House leaders changed their plans, the impending snow storm would mean lawmakers may not return until Tuesday at the earliest. That would put final passage sometime Wednesday or Thursday, virtually guaranteeing Congress does not complete consideration of the bills until after the Friday deadline.

House GOP leaders would also likely be grappling with attendance issues if they did order a return, with various lawmakers on planned trips and over a dozen busy campaigning for higher office.

A partial government shutdown would mean only agencies that Congress has not yet funded would have to reduce or cease functions — in this case, payment to active duty troops, air traffic controllers, and border patrol agents could all be affected.