The Military Classification of Unauthorized Movement During Peacetime, Tension, Mobilization, or War

By Brigadier General Dr. Mohamed Al-Zain Mohamed

(A commentary on the question: Who fired the first shot?)
Unauthorized Movement = Mutiny

1.
It is an established principle in military doctrine that war has four dimensions: attack, defense, advance, and withdrawal. Therefore, any military movement—whether forward or in retreat—is fundamentally a combat action and must occur within the framework of command and control, under the supervision of intelligence and operations. This applies not only to military movements but also to movements by civilian entities—especially those tied to official or quasi-official structures.

2.
In professional systems, any movement by state leadership—civilian or military—without informing military operations and intelligence is considered a serious breach.

At the civilian level, such a move constitutes an administrative and political violation that warrants accountability.

At the military level, however, the violation is far more serious—it can amount to a military offense, potentially prosecutable under emergency laws or military justice, because such behavior disrupts the balance of force and threatens national security.

3.
Example: Civilian Leadership Movement
At the highest levels of state, movement is subject to strict coordination protocols. For instance, if the President of the United States—as Commander-in-Chief—plans to travel from one city to another within the country, the military must be notified in advance. An operational clearance must be secured—not merely political approval, but concrete security coordination and field readiness. Units along the route must be informed of the time, path, and be placed on alert. This is not ceremonial; it is a fundamental part of national security doctrine and military discipline.

Example: Military Movement
Likewise, no military unit is authorized to move freely without a formal movement order approved by operations and intelligence. This order must be recorded and logged in operational books. That is the essence of military discipline: no rifle, no vehicle, no personnel moves without a clear order through a recognized chain of command.

4.
Applying this principle to the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) movement toward Merowe on April 14, 2023, the incident clearly constitutes a hostile action, even if it was framed as a “redeployment” or “temporary positioning.” Here’s why:

The movement was not coordinated with the General Command, Joint Operations Command, Military Intelligence, or even the Commander-in-Chief, under whose authority the RSF was supposed to operate (Note: Article 5 of the RSF Law was abolished, but Article 6 still clearly states that the RSF is part of the Armed Forces and operates under the Supreme Commander).

The movement occurred in a strategically sensitive military zone—Merowe Airport, which houses military aircraft and a military base in northern Sudan.

It took place outside the chain of command and without military discipline, and provoked an unprecedented reaction within the Sudanese Armed Forces.

It sparked the collapse of trust between the military and the RSF and marked the beginning of the countdown to the outbreak of war on April 15.

5. Final Note:
This movement amounted to a de facto declaration of war and a clear violation of military coordination protocols and national sovereignty. The state should have responded to it with greater severity at the time. According to the rules of engagement, any unauthorized, uncoordinated movement by an armed force within national borders can only be interpreted as an act of mutiny or a direct threat to both the army and the state.