Full Analysis Summary
Heglig oil field deployment
South Sudan moved forces into the Heglig oil field after a rare tripartite arrangement between South Sudan's President Salva Kiir, Sudan Armed Forces chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and Rapid Support Forces leader Mohamed 'Hemedti' Dagalo.
The stated aim was to 'neutralise' Heglig and withdraw Sudanese combatants so Juba's troops could secure the site.
Sources describe the deployment as limited to protection of infrastructure rather than offensive operations.
Coverage Differences
Tone/Narrative
Evrim Ağacı (West Asian) emphasizes the escalation and diplomatic alarm after the RSF seized Heglig on December 8, 2025 and stresses the humanitarian stakes, while OilPrice (Other) and Dabanga (Other) focus more on the technical tripartite arrangement and Juba’s stated limited mandate to secure infrastructure. Evrim Ağacı reports the initial seizure date and broader conflict context, whereas OilPrice and Dabanga highlight the agreement’s language that Juba 'will only protect installations' and remain neutral.
Sudan withdrawal and crossings
Sources report the deal called for both Sudanese factions to withdraw so Juba’s troops could secure infrastructure and prevent sabotage.
Multiple outlets repeated that South Sudan would not undertake operations inside Sudan.
Accounts differ on details of retreating Sudanese personnel and local chaos.
Evrim Ağacı cites official figures of weapon handovers by some 1,700 personnel (60 officers and 1,650 NCOs).
It also reports local accounts of roughly 3,900 soldiers entering Rubkona County.
Dabanga describes SAF units crossing into South Sudan and surrendering weapons amid thousands of civilians fleeing across the border.
Coverage Differences
Detail/Omission
Evrim Ağacı (West Asian) provides specific numerical claims about surrendered personnel and divergent official vs. local counts, while OilPrice (Other) summarizes the tripartite terms without repeating those specific tallies; Dabanga (Other) focuses on the fact of SAF units crossing and surrendering weapons and on civilian displacement. This shows Evrim Ağacı includes granular figures that the other two sources omit, whereas Dabanga emphasizes border crossings and surrender rather than precise counts.
Heglig oil production decline
Three outlets emphasize Heglig's strategic economic importance to South Sudan.
They note the central processing facility's capacity at about 130,000 barrels per day.
They report a collapse in output, with two sources estimating production fell from roughly 65,000 bpd to about 20,000 bpd since fighting escalated in April 2023.
These details are used to explain why Juba would intervene to secure processing and export infrastructure.
Coverage Differences
Emphasis
Crude Oil Prices Today | OilPrice (Other) emphasizes Heglig's strategic importance to South Sudan and the facility’s 130,000 bpd handling capacity in economic terms, while Dabanga (Other) contrasts Sudan’s marginal oil revenues with South Sudan’s dependence and explicitly frames the facility as 'about 130,000 barrels/day capacity for South Sudanese crude.' Evrim Ağacı (West Asian) includes the capacity detail within a broader conflict and humanitarian framing rather than a pure economic analysis.
CNPC withdrawal and warnings
Industry and government actions reported across sources include the withdrawal of China National Petroleum Corporation after decades of operations.
Analysts and former officials warned that active fighting makes production effectively impossible.
Dabanga quotes former oil minister Adel Ibrahim saying 'operations cannot function with guns present,' while OilPrice notes CNPC 'confirmed it has withdrawn from Sudan after three decades.'
Coverage Differences
Attribution/Quotation
Dabanga (Other) explicitly quotes Adel Ibrahim warning that 'operations cannot function with guns present' to attribute the operational risk to a named former minister; OilPrice (Other) reports CNPC’s withdrawal as a corporate confirmation after 'three decades,' while Evrim Ağacı (West Asian) places the CNPC exit and analyst warnings inside a broader humanitarian and diplomatic escalation. The difference lies in Dabanga foregrounding a named expert quotation, OilPrice foregrounding the corporate action, and Evrim Ağacı integrating both into conflict context.
Coverage of Sudan conflict
The incident prompted sharp diplomatic and humanitarian concern in the coverage.
Evrim Ağacı stresses the escalation and humanitarian alarm, noting the conflict has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and pushed parts of Sudan toward famine.
Other outlets underline economic fallout and limited immediate fiscal impact for Khartoum, but warn of potential long-term damage to the sector.
Across all sources, the narrative frames Juba's deployment as narrowly protective even as the event deepens regional instability and prompts urgent diplomacy.
Coverage Differences
Severity/Tone
Evrim Ağacı (West Asian) uses severe humanitarian language — 'killed tens of thousands, displaced millions and pushed parts of Sudan toward famine' — highlighting human cost and diplomatic alarm; OilPrice (Other) frames the story more around strategic and economic consequences (production drops, CNPC withdrawal) and Dabanga (Other) balances neutrality claims with economic dependency and operational warnings. This shows a tonal split where Evrim Ağacı foregrounds humanitarian catastrophe while the Other sources foreground economic and operational ramifications.