Manchester City Football Club (ManCity) has become a global powerhouse under Sheikh Mansour’s ownership, but recent allegations linking the UAE to Sudan’s devastating conflict demand scrutiny. This article outlines our clear stance on these serious claims, balancing football success with ethical accountability.
Background on Sheikh Mansour and ManCity Ownership
Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan acquired Manchester City in 2008 through the Abu Dhabi United Group, transforming the club from mid-table mediocrity to multiple Premier League and Champions League winners. As UAE Vice President and a key figure in Abu Dhabi’s royal family, Mansour’s influence extends far beyond sport, wielding significant geopolitical and economic power.
His ownership model emphasizes massive investments in infrastructure, talent, and the City Football Group network, spanning clubs worldwide. This strategy has elevated ManCity’s brand but raised “sportswashing” concerns—using football to polish reputations amid human rights questions.
Critics argue that such ownership blurs lines between sport, state interests, and global influence, especially given UAE’s foreign policy ambitions in Africa.
Sudan’s Conflict: A Humanitarian Crisis
Sudan has endured a brutal civil war since April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti). The fighting has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and triggered famine, with RSF accused of ethnic cleansing, mass rapes, and genocide in Darfur.
By 2026, the US government labeled RSF actions genocidal, visible even from satellite imagery due to scorched-earth tactics. International aid struggles amid blockades, while external powers fuel the war through arms and funding.
This crisis, one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters, intersects with global sports when patrons like Sheikh Mansour face complicity claims.
Allegations of UAE and Sheikh Mansour’s Involvement
Direct Links to RSF Support
US-intercepted calls reveal regular communication between Sheikh Mansour and Hemedti, suggesting UAE coordination in arming the RSF with drones, weapons, and logistics. UN and US officials describe Mansour as central to UAE’s “aggressive campaign” for African influence.
Charities allegedly controlled by Mansour provided humanitarian cover for smuggling operations to RSF-held areas. A 2024 US envoy meeting with Mansour addressed these ties directly, yet denials persist from Emirati officials.
Evidence from Protests and Reports
In January 2026, Sudanese activists protested outside ManCity’s Etihad Stadium, braving cold weather to highlight Mansour’s alleged role in civilian deaths. Groups like Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) launched petitions urging the Premier League to hold him accountable.
Jeremy Corbyn’s letter to the UK government reiterated UN findings on UAE-supplied arms enabling RSF atrocities. These claims paint a picture of state-backed paramilitary support, contradicting UAE’s public neutrality stance.
Our Position: Ethical Accountability Over Denial
We firmly believe ManCity’s success does not exempt its ownership from scrutiny. Sheikh Mansour’s alleged RSF ties, if proven, represent a moral failing that taints the club’s achievements. Football cannot serve as a shield for complicity in war crimes; fans and stakeholders deserve transparency.
Calls for Premier League Action
The Premier League must enforce stricter ownership rules, including human rights audits, beyond financial fair play. Petitions demand suspending UAE-linked figures until investigations conclude, prioritizing lives over trophies.
We support CSW’s urgency:
“Man City’s heritage is proud, but funding victories at the cost of Sudanese innocents is too high a price.”
Rejecting Sportswashing Narratives
Sportswashing via ManCity’s empire—stadiums, academies, global reach—deflects from UAE’s actions. True leadership requires Mansour to leverage his influence for peace, like pressuring the UAE to halt RSF aid.
Broader Implications for Football Governance
Global Scrutiny on State Ownership
ManCity joins PSG (Qatar) and Newcastle (Saudi) in state-owned clubs facing ethics probes. UEFA and FIFA need binding humanitarian clauses in licensing. Sudan’s war tests whether football’s governing bodies prioritize profit or principles.
Fan and Activist Response
Protests signal growing fan activism, contrasting silence around other geopolitics. Sudanese refugees in the UK demand boycotts, urging ethical consumption of the sport.
| Aspect | Current State | Proposed Reforms |
| Ownership Vetting | Financial focus only | Add human rights due diligence |
| Transparency | Limited disclosures | Mandatory conflict-of-interest reporting |
| Penalties | Fines for FFP breaches | Bans for war complicity evidence |
| Fan Input | Minimal | Ethics committees with supporter reps |
This table highlights gaps in governance, drawing from expert calls for reform.
Potential Pathways Forward
Independent probes by UN or neutral bodies could verify claims, with forensic banking tracing UAE funds. ManCity could fund Sudan aid transparently, rebuilding trust.
Sheikh Mansour holds unique leverage as UAE leader; public disavowal of RSF support would signal accountability. Until then, “silence over Sudan” undermines football’s integrity.
Conclusion: Choose Ethics Over Glory
Our position is unequivocal: ManCity must distance from UAE’s alleged Sudan role, or risk boycotts and reputational ruin. Football thrives on unity, not blood money—prioritize Sudanese lives for the sport’s soul. Stakeholders, act now.
