Connect with us

Middle East

An Unspeakable Nightmare: The Yemeni Crisis

Published

on

Rania and her eldest daughter, Amani, stand in the entrance to their home in a camp for internally displaced people in Lahj, Yemen. Photo: WFP/Mohammed Awadh

Authors: Khushi Malhotra and Vedant Avdhoot Sumant*

Why is Yemen at War?

After North and South Yemen merged, Saleh and Beidh decided to share power and form the Republic of Yemen on 22.05.1990. On 15.05.1991, the people of Yemen approved the constitutional Referendum which invested and respected human rights with and for the citizens. However, after such unification, there were disagreements between, President Ali Abdullah Saleh and the Yemen’s Gulf Neighbours and the US of A.Disagreements, like these, sowed seeds for the current multifaceted problems faced by the country. Since then there have been various ceasefire agreements like ‘The Six-Point Government of Yemen-Houthi Ceasefire Agreement’ in 2010, ‘Hodeidah Agreement’ in 2018 backed by UN Resolution No. 2452, ‘Ceasefire order by Ansar Allah’, ‘Seven Point Peace Plan on Muscat Principles’ and their subsequent breaches ranging right from the Yemeni Arab Spring to the killing of Ex-President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Over the years, Yemen has struggled in matters of good governance, stability, infrastructural developments, uplifting people, improving the standards of living and reduction of poverty, however, the current civil war in the country has exacerbated the situation. Incidents of political turmoil like the Houthis suspending the constitution and seizing the government in the early months of 2015 have further degraded the already appalling conditions pre-existing in the region. All the acts compounded together have led to Yemen undergoing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

International Laws Applicable : Human Casualties and Unprotected Rights

The conflict in Yemen involves countries like Saudi Arabia,  Egypt, Jordan, Morocco etc. supporting the Internationally recognized Government of Yemen and Iran supporting the Houthi’s, and several other countries,  however, it can’t be termed as an International Armed Conflict as the clashes are not between two states but between parties of the same country. Therefore, the rules of Non- International Armed conflicts apply. The criteria’s that have to be fulfilled are:-

1. Firstly, the armed violence must reach a certain degree of intensity so that it causes internal disturbances and tensions.

2. Secondly, at least one of the party to the armed conflict must be a non-state armed group forming an organisation.

These two conditions having been fulfilled in Yemen confirms the presence of Non-International Armed Conflict and applicability of its rules. The conflicts of such nature are governed by the treaties and rules of Customary International Lawas mentioned in International Humanitarian Law. The humanitarian laws that govern Non-International Armed Conflict and to which Yemen has ratified are the Common Article 3 to the four Geneva Convention 1949 and the Additional Protocol II. Common Article 3 prohibits cruel, humiliating and derogatory treatment. It further ensures that all parties to the conflict are humanely treated at all times. The exercise of territorial control and military operations in Yemen showcase that the criterion for implementation of Additional Protocol II has also been fulfilled. It entails the prohibition of direct attacks against civilians, prohibition on attacking indiscriminately, respecting the principle of proportionality in attack, and the obligation to take all feasible precautions in planning and executing military operations so as to avoid civilian casualties. Considering these rules, there is no denial of the fact thatthe rules of International law have grossly been violated due to the conflicts in Yemen.

Apart from the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocol II, Yemen has ratified various treaties including but not limited to the, Anti- Mine Ban Convention, 1997, that prohibits the use of weapons that leads to, ‘superfluous injury and unnecessary sufferings.’ It means that the use of such weapons is prohibited which might cause mass destruction. However, these regulations have been grossly violated in Yemen as the repeated use of anti-personnel mines, unlawful airstrikes, launching of ballistic missiles and use of fire weapons in the cities have largely killed and injured the civilian population. For instance, The unlawful airstrikes in Yemen by the Saudi-led Coalition on Houthi detention centres killed not less than 200 civilians. This attack was marked as one of the deadliest attacks in Yemen. The armed groups have been ruthlessly using unlawful methods of warfare causing mass destruction and loss of civilian life. The use of such technologically advanced weapons makes it difficult to implement the principle of proportionality and furthermore when such weapons are used without regulations it leads to war crimes. Therefore, there is a dire need to stop the use of such ‘high-tech’ weapons that cause mass destruction in order to protect the civilians and adhere to the International Humanitarian Law rules.

Yemen has also ratified several International Human Rights treaties like, United Nations Convention Against Torture, Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of  Discrimination Against Women, United Nations Convention on Rights of Child etc. though the well intentioned words of these conventions are rarely if not at all effectuated at the ground level. Yemen has ratified various International Human Rights treaties that would ensure protection to its citizens. All of these treaties ensure that all the persons irrespective of war, will not be discriminated and that their safety and dignity will not be compromised, yet, the constant bombing campaign in Yemen has led to the killing of more than 17,500 civilians. Further, In 2018, Yemen witnessed the inhumane act of bombing children which led to the murder of 40 while injuring 56 thus proving that the rules of International Human Rights law have been grossly violated. Furthermore, Feminist Perspective focusing on women specific rights gained traction when on 29.01.2011 women such as Twakkol Karman made various demands including equal representation, ending maternal mortality, illiteracy among others. UNFPA and its partners are continuing efforts to support women and girls to prevent abuse, by raising awareness for women’s rights, but the situation of women and girls is not likely to improve until the hostilities end, safety is restored and equality of women becomes a priority.

Furthermore, The US military aid to the Saudi coalition is in violation to the Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign Assistance Act as discussed in the Resolution No. 54 presented in the US Senate on February 28, 2018. All the arms deals by the various nations are not only ethically and morally wrong but they also go against their commitment to the UN-Arms Trade Treaty. The parties involved thereto complicit in the crisis ongoing in the region are, ironically also the biggest humanitarian aid contributors. The US of A with Britain, Switzerland, Sweden and a few others have been aiding the Saudi led coalition by providing arms and enforcing maritime naval blockades and embargoswhich have further worsened the food shortage situation in Yemen. The humanitarian pledges by the donor countries are not only being delayed but are also being contradicted by the military actions that they are undertaking. The restrictions and blockades imposed by the Saudis, UAE and the Houthis need to be eased if not removed while taking political interests in consideration as land routes are being bombed and the Red sea is being rigged with sea mines. The attacks by the Islamic State have further dented the humanitarian efforts and have created a deeper crisis which puts a question on the very existence of the country’s citizens. 

These and actions similar to them have been preventing effective humanitarian aid for the Yemeni citizens who are living a life subpar to even animal existence. The armed groups in Yemen have targeted various, urban centres causing great deal of civilian causalities. Furthermore, the attacks have also led to the destruction of civilian infrastructures like, the schools, hospitals, farms, funerals and various factories. All this violence has rendered human rights of the people of Yemen ineffectual.

Conclusion : Urgent need to Prioritize Humanity 

Yemen is undergoing a severe humanitarian crisis, with its clinics and medical infrastructure severely damaged and crippled because of continued air strikes and a tussle between the various groups seeking to take control of disputed regions having rendered the medics vulnerable to attacks. It is pertinent to note that, the human rights situation in Yemen is so dreadful that it has been regarded as ‘frightening’ by the Yemeni Human Rights Minister. The reports suggest that more than a 1000 people have disappeared with hundreds having been kidnapped. Further, in 2018, Saudi-led coalition was included in the ‘list of shame’ by UN for killing/ injuring 729 children, that accounted for half of the child casualty statistics  which is wholly unwarranted and inhumane. 

The resulting political chaos has shifted the focus from various epidemics that the Yemeni’s have suffered through the years like the Cholera outbreak in December 2017, Malaria, Diphtheria, Measles, Meningitis, Dengue and other Diarrheal diseases in identified locations of internally displaced people. Approximately 400,000 children under the age of 5 years were suffering severe acute malnutrition in 2018. The aforementioned description is a resultant of 5 factors namely socio-economic factors, environmental degradation, breakdown of the healthcare system, insecurity, and political instability.

Attention must also be given to the problems faced by Yemeni’s during this Coronavirus pandemic where the administration of Yemen has been unable to accurately determine the number of active corona cases in the region due to an unavailability of adequate workforce and test kits but has reported more than 900 positive cases. There is complete lack of transparency in the data provided yet this data pertains only to those areas controlled by the Saudi led coalition. The rebel controlled areas which are even more densely populated have reported just 4 cases which is impractical and hard to believe. The strain on resources has resulted into this situation being incongruous to proper testing and assessment of the number of active corona cases in the area. Yemen is therefore one of the worst cases of a multi-faceted humanitarian crisis. Merely stating statistics will not bring an end to this crisis. The war must be withheld in such precarious situations and if not on a permanent basis at least for a temporary period of time a Federal Division natured solution must be agreed upon. The pain suffered by Yemeni’s must in fact be empathised with by the International community. This article is a mere attempt to spread awareness thereby snowballing International pressure on the parties involved in the dispute thereto, by coercing them to prioritise humanity over their vested interests.

*Vedant Avdhoot Sumant , Gujarat National Law University , Gandhinagar. 

I am a Vth year Law Student from, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda pursuing B.A. LLB (hons.). Throughout the five years of law school I have developed profound interest in areas related to International Law and subjects related to it. In future, if I have the opportunity to contribute my knowledge and understanding of importance of social issues and its threat to the society, I would thoroughly utilize that opportunity to eliminate/reduce the miseries faced by children of my country. I strongly believe that, prosperity of the country is dependent upon the well-being of children in the country.

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

The failure of the US-backed Israeli peace agreements and its normalisation with the Gulf states

Published

on

Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian

Egyptian diplomacy has always played a (positive mediation role to consolidate the ceasefire between the Palestinians and the Israelis, especially in the recent events in Gaza 2021, and Egypt was ready to work with everyone and Israel), in order to promote an early, comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Palestinian issue on the basis of a “the two states solution” and work together to contribute to achieving lasting peace in the Middle East. Israel, as a close ally of the United States of America, considers that “the dismantling of the terrorist infrastructure is the first step in the road map towards peace and stability in the region, and indeed it constitutes a valid basis for any peace process”. Israel has also always emphasized that “building and achieving peace requires creating a positive atmosphere between all its parties in an atmosphere free of terrorism and incitement, which encourages efforts to reach an understanding between its parties”.

   However, if the current US administration of President “Joe Biden” avoided inviting the Egyptian side and all Arab parties and forces not to attend the conference of democracies in the world, with the exception of Israel and Iraq only from the heart of the Arab region, it will have (negative and dangerous repercussions on the security of the Hebrew state, and weaken the Israeli peace plans with the Arab Gulf countries mediated by the United States), and this can be analyzed through:

   It is possible that (Arab countries take collective steps to stop peace plans and political normalization with Israel under American auspices), due to the excessive sensitivity of the description or stigmatization of the United States of America as “non-democratic countries”, and therefore not to invite them to the conference of American democracies.  This may contribute to stopping and freezing all multilateral contacts that Washington had encouraged on regional cooperation between the countries of the region and Israel.  With the American side neglecting that (moving forward and cooperating in areas that affect the lives of all who live in this region will contribute psychologically to confronting the complex political issues that must be dealt with and resolved).

   Likewise, the danger of this American step in avoiding the invitation of Egypt, despite it being one of the most important contributors to regional stability, according to a published report issued by the “National Security Agency of the United States of America”, will lead to a continuous escalation of these terrorist attacks targeting security in the Sinai Peninsula, which could be understanding of the successive Israeli protests for such actions that affect the Israel’s security.

   The American provocation to Cairo will increase the activities and number of terrorist groups in Sinai and direct them to work against Israel itself, including (the Sinai Province organization) and its known terrorist activity in targeting ambushes of the Egyptian army in the city of Rafah and others, as it tries, along with the “Ansar Beit al-Maqdis organization”, which is ssociated with the terrorist organization “ISIS”, intimidating civilians by attacking them and carrying out terrorist operations, near the border strip parallel to the border of Israel.

   The activity of (ISIS Sinai Province) can be seen with (its repeatedly expression of its anti-Israel intentions, although its main goals for now are still focused on harming Egypt). This has remained the case even amid the numerous Israeli strikes that were described in Israel as “urgent”, and will not bear fruit without joint security coordination between Israel and Cairo to control the activity of terrorist groups and their extremist activities and movements in Sinai.

  If the estimates related to the strikes launched by these terrorist organizations in Sinai are aimed at (threatening the stability of Tel Aviv and the Israeli response mechanism against them), it is reasonable to assume that the leaders of the “Islamic State of Sinai” who were realised the growing role of the “Israeli army” in  Sinai.  However, they have not yet changed their policy toward Israel, especially with their awareness of the sensitivity of relations between Cairo and Washington, as a result of the United States not inviting Egypt and the countries of the region to attend the democracy conference.

    The current situation has worsened dangerously at the present time, especially after the American withdrawal from Afghanistan, and ISIS defied Washington by intensifying its attacks on several main targets, especially on “Kabul Airport in Afghanistan”, and the announcement of ISIS with its headquarters in the Afghan state of “Khursan” for its responsibility for the attack and the killing of dozens of American soldiers themselves. This means, that (Israel’s security may have become threatened in light of the close US-Israeli alliance in the region and the extensions of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq “ISIS” to the Sinai land in Egypt, near the border areas with Israel, and thus its security threat).

  Although ISIS forces in Iraq and Syria lost almost all of their territory, from here (the Sinai Peninsula may become the only remaining “province” of the organization), which makes it a suitable haven for fighters from other fronts, all of whom target the security and threat of Israe

   Also, the Egyptian government’s lack of control over the Sinai Peninsula, due to the “annexes of the Camp David agreement with Israel”, carries with it great potential for the extremist organization to target the security of the Hebrew state, as it gives it great opportunities to extort resources from the local population and military personnel, and (expand its support among residents, and perhaps take advantage of its proximity to the Israeli border).

  Here, all Israeli and American military analyzes affirm with certainty that the “Islamic State” organization and its supporters in Sinai will do everything in their power (continuing to work in Israel or working with other countries to threaten Tel Aviv itself).

    However, it is likely that the facts on the ground will make Sinai the next focal point for ISIS, and this will be more important and dangerous than ever, and will serve as a (security dilemma that Israel is severely facing, therefore, the support of the Egyptian army in its battle against these terrorist organizations, their extremist activities and movements has become the duty of both Israeli and American leaders themselves).

  Hence, (Strengthening the stability of the Egyptian state and consolidating its sovereignty to protect Israel security and maintain the security of Sinai is a very important strategic goal).  In recent years, Israel has sought to facilitate the achievement of this goal by agreeing to temporary amendments to the security arrangements of the “Camp David Accords”, and this has already been done recently. Especially with (the successive Egyptian security requests since the revolution of January 25, 2011 until recently from the Israeli and American sides to work together to maintain the security of Sinai), and thus not to endanger Israeli security due to the succession of these terrorist incidents on the Sinai land near the border with Israel.

   Perhaps this explains the reasons for this increasing repeatedly demand from Cairo for getting the required (permission from the United States of America and Israel itself to deploy large-scale armored forces in the Sinai Peninsula, and Israel generally agreed to this request, and Egypt granted extensions of treaty exceptions according to need).  According to published Israeli security and military reports, Israel is also greatly assisting the Egyptian forces in the field of intelligence and air strikes in the region to thwart terrorist operations near the Tel Aviv borders.

  Despite my reading of American and Western academic analyzes, in which other Western analysts assert that Cairo has given the “Israeli army” absolute freedom to target fighters in Sinai with manned and unmanned aircraft.  However, from my point of view, the result is one, and it is represented in the importance of the joint security agreement and coordination between Israel, Egypt, with Washington to “confront the activities of all extremist terrorist organizations against the security of Sinai because of their common danger to the security of Israel and Cairo”.

  Although Cairo’s assistance to Israel is very important, this goal does not cancel the basic security concept on which the “Camp David Agreement” and the military annex of Sinai are based, meaning that:    

(Maintaining Sinai as an impenetrable barrier against any future hostilities  It may reach Israel from Egypt)

   We can explain all of the revolutionary events during the “period of the Arab Spring revolutions”, specifically the revolutions of January 25, 2011 and the June 30 revolution in Egypt in 2013 – especially after the storming of the Israeli embassy in Cairo – during the events of the revolution, and even the subsequent coming of the rule of the “Muslim Brotherhood” after a few months, it is evidence of the extent of the instability of the situation, and how important it is to keep the Sinai Peninsula under the Egyptian-Israeli security control, in view of (the long-term growth and spread of terrorism, extremism and arms movement, which threatens Israeli national security).

  Thus, Sinai constitutes a real and growing dilemma for both Israeli and American policy. On the one hand, it is necessary to provide as much assistance as possible to Cairo to (re-establish its sovereignty and prevent destabilizing shocks to Israel’s stability). On the other hand, the ongoing fighting leads to the possibility of instability in the Sinai borders parallel to Israel, so Israel must be prepared for any scenario. Hence, the (necessity of coordination between Israel and Egypt in the Sinai to eliminate the danger of extremism, terrorism and militants close to the Egyptian and Israeli fronts alike).

   Hence, the Egyptian researcher can accurately analyze the situation and perhaps (from a different analytical angle) that Egypt’s failure to invite “President Joe Biden’s administration to the Conference of Democracies” has serious and long-term repercussions on the security of Sinai and even on the political and regional stability in the region in  “Not inviting any Arab or regional party to the conference of democracies with the exception of Israel and Iraq,” and this would increase the level and degree of security sensitivities between Cairo and Tel Aviv.  the depth of the Israeli state itself), and thus launching more destabilizing attacks from inside Tel Aviv, which Washington did not pay close attention to.

   Hence, it is possible to understand and analyze “behind this American step by excluding Egypt and the countries of the region from their democracy”, which is:

  The effect and implications of not inviting Cairo, the Arab Gulf states, and the entire Arab region to the Conference of American Democracies under the auspices of “Biden”, will inevitably affect the (level of joint contacts to promote more Israeli peace plans with the countries of the region with American support), and will affect the degree of joint security and political coordination between the three (Egyptian, Israeli, American) parties, which will increase the danger, activity and penetration of all these extremist terrorist organizations, especially what is known as, the “Islamic State Organization of the Sinai Province”, as well as the danger of (the intertwining and growing extension of “ISIS” into Sinai itself and launching attacks against Israel)

    Hence, the Biden administration has caused (the spread of extremism, terrorism and religious extremism on the land of Sinai, and the most important threat to Israel’s security from within and on its borders), which Washington may not have taken into account, in order to preserve the interests of its Israeli partner, so perhaps  Israel must urgently demand its American ally to reduce attempts to provoke its Egyptian neighbor and the rest of the Arab and Gulf countries, even the printing press with it, in accordance with peace agreements, normalization, and security and borders coordination, in order to preserve the security of Israel itself, and to preserve the joint military-security coordination mechanism between Egypt and Israel under American auspices, so that the amendment of the “new Camp David security amendment” to allow the Egyptian presence and Israeli coordination and their military deployment in the Sinai does not turn into an extreme and very dangerous targeting of all Israelis, thus undermining and targeting  Washington’s interests, by extension, in Egypt and the region.

Continue Reading

Middle East

The question with contradictory US human rights policies towards Saudi Arabia and Iran

Published

on

A cursory look at Saudi Arabia and Iran suggests that emphasizing human rights in US foreign policy may complicate relations but has little impact on regional stability or the willingness of protagonists to reduce tension and manage conflicts when it is in their interest.

A post 9/11 US emphasis on human rights was not what inspired homegrown popular Arab revolts over the past decade that initially toppled leaders in eight Arab countries but were largely rolled back or stymied by counter-revolutionary US allies.

The UAE and Saudi counter-revolutionary efforts put the two Gulf states on the autocratic frontline of President Joe Biden’s democracy versus autocracy dichotomy. They were motivated by a rejection of democracy as an existential challenge to the absolute power of their ruling families.

Subsequent US administrations effectively let the counter-revolutionary moves pass, although, to be fair, the Biden administration has suspended $700 million in aid to Sudan following a military power grab in October. However, it has yet to do the same with an additional $500 million for Tunisia. Democratically elected President Kais Saied disbanded parliament in July and assumed the power to enact laws.

By the same token, Middle Eastern protagonists, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran, opted to reduce tensions and explore ways of managing their differences to focus on reforming and diversifying their economies, fuelling growth, and stimulating trade.

In other words, they would have sought to reduce tensions even if they had not anticipated that the Biden administration would adopt a more human rights and democratic values-driven foreign policy and would want to focus on Asia rather than the Middle East.

If anything, a contentious relationship with the United States could have provided a further incentive for reducing tensions. Yemen, which figured prominently in Iran’s talks with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, may be a case in point.

As a result, the regional moves raise the question of whether a US refusal to stand up for principle produces the kind of short-term results that outweigh the long-term cost of autocracy as well as the price of undermining US credibility.

The short-term results of abandoning principle for pragmatism were evident in this week’s shift in oil politics.

The shift was prompted by US efforts to assure the kingdom and other Gulf states that the United States was no longer in the regime change business. US officials also insisted that the administration would concentrate on maintaining and strengthening regional partnerships. They signaled that the administration’s lip service to human rights and democratic values would not have policy consequences.

The message was well received in Riyadh. In response, Saudi Arabia reversed its rejection of Mr. Biden’s request to increase oil production to reduce soaring prices at US gas stations.

The de facto leader of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the cartel’s largest producer, Saudi Arabia, said the group and its associates, which include Russia, would increase monthly production by 400,000 barrels a day.

The Saudi concession also came in response to the administration’s willingness to sell the kingdom US$650 million worth of missiles. The sale threatened to further call into question the credibility of the United States as it prepared to host this week’s virtual Summit for Democracy, which some 110 countries are expected to attend.

The administration says the sale is in line with its policy of supplying only defensive weapons to the kingdom as US officials push for an end to the devastating, almost seven-year-long Yemen war that has sparked one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.

Administration officials assert that the missiles would enable Saudi Arabia to shoot down Houthi drones in the air before they hit targets in the kingdom but cannot be used for attacks against the rebels in Yemen itself.

The Senate vote could set the tone for the democracy summit. Anti-Saudi sentiment runs deep in the US Congress. A vote against the sale would force Mr. Biden to cancel it or override the Senate with a veto.

Saudi violations of human rights, the killing in 2018 of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the kingdom’s crackdown on dissent and freedom of expression, and its conduct of the Yemen war fueled the anti-Saudi sentiment.

With the arms sale on the line, the administration has remained silent about reports that Saudi Arabia and the UAE had used a combination of economic incentives and threats to pressure African and Asian nations to vote for the shutdown of a United Nations investigation into abuses of human rights in the war.

Meanwhile, the administration’s efforts to reassure Middle Eastern nations that its policy emphasis has changed has done little to prevent Iranian negotiators at the Vienna talks on reviving a 2015 international agreement that curbed the country’s nuclear programme from hardening their positions.

Iran believes that the United States and, at least until recently, some of its Gulf allies, aim to encircle the Islamic republic and foment domestic unrest that will lead to the regime’s fall. The US has imposed crippling sanctions in response to its nuclear programme and harshly criticized Iran for its abusive human rights record.

That has not stopped Iran from engaging in separate talks with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which appear to be producing results in Yemen.

As a result of those talks, Saudi and Emirati forces, and their Yemeni allies, were reportedly withdrawing from positions in southern and western parts of the country.

 “These are very likely the opening moves by Saudi Arabia and the UAE as they prepare to fully exit Yemen,” said former member of the United Nations Panel of Experts on Yemen Gregory D. Johnson.

The war has increasingly turned into an albatross around Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s neck, with much of the international community wanting to see an end to the conflict.

It was not immediately clear if and what Iran may have offered in return for the withdrawals that have allowed the Houthis to move into evacuated spaces. “The latest developments seem to suggest that the Houthis seem on the edge of gaining the upper hand,” said NATO Foundation analyst Umberto Profazio.

In line with that assessment, the Houthis have not indicated that they had become more interested in a negotiated end to the war.

“It is clear that the Houthis intend to try to bring down the Yemen government. The Iranians, I believe, would like to see the same,” said US special envoy to Yemen Tim Lenderking.

The Emirati withdrawals, particularly around the strategic port of Hodeida, follow gestures including an effort to return internationally isolated Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to the Arab fold and an exchange of visits with Iran. Syrian membership in the Arab League was suspended early in the civil war.

Some analysts suggested that the withdrawals in Yemen were part of an effort to build confidence. However, it was not clear why the Saudis and Emiratis would cede strategic territory with no apparent Iranian or Houthi concessions in return unless they were looking for a rush to the exit no matter what.

“The pull-out was unnecessary to open new frontlines, and Hodeida seems to have paid the price for confidence-building with Iran,” said Yemen analyst Ibrahim Jalal.

The withdrawals, including from Mara on the Yemeni border with Oman, help Saudi Arabia put its backyard in order. Saudi operations in Mara irritated Oman that sees the Yemeni region as its sphere of influence.

The withdrawals helped facilitate a visit to Oman by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman this week. Mr. Bin Salman may try to reach an agreement during the visit to construct a pipeline from the kingdom’s oil fields to an export terminal in Oman. The pipeline would allow Saudi Arabia is to circumvent the Strait of Hormuz.

In the final analysis of the pros and cons of a values-driven US foreign policy, hardline realists will argue that backing down on rights produces tangible results.

Yet, the United States’ selective and opportunistic hardline emphasis on rights and values in Iran has not prevented the Islamic republic from engaging with Saudi Arabia and the UAE and possibly helping to end the Yemen war. The pressure may have been one factor that persuaded Iran to engage.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Democracy Summit: Excluding countries and igniting the Cold War in the Middle East

Published

on

A number of American leaks have appeared at the present time for several American think tanks that have reached a dangerous conclusion, which is: (The United States of America must re-use the influence of the extremist Islamic currents and radical political Islam movements in the Middle East and Africa to confront the rise of China in the first place). Hence, the first practical American application of this through the conference to divide the world democratically, according to the American concept, through the following possible scenarios:

   Washington may have practically started using the game of “rapprochement with extremist currents in the face of communist China”, which can be understood through (the United States of America is currently trying to re-use the strategy of rapprochement with extremist currents and political Islam currents in the face of the Chinese and Russian communist enemy as well), and made them raise  Ideological slogans whose purpose is to “ignite the region sectarianly and religiously and cause chaos and turmoil”, and Washington helps in this the ambitions of some nascent national forces in the Middle East, or perhaps some individuals and civil organizations with narrow, limited interests at the expense and in the face of their homelands.

   The American prominent book, which is called (The Devil’s Game: Political Islam and the United States), which was published by “Robert Dreyfuss”, who is an American scholar, specializing in political Islam, is one of the most academic efforts close to understanding the support of the United States and the West in general for the project of so-called political Islam, as well as presenting, highlighting and analyzing of (all American plans aimed at attracting the extremist currents in the Middle East, bringing them closer and using them by the USA to cause unrest in their regions), by fueling their exploitation in achieving sectarian and religious fanaticism in the Arab world.

   Here, the author of the aforementioned book, “Robert Dreyfuss”, presented many of the mysteries and unknown reasons about those (secret and mysterious alliances that the United States of America made with Muslim Brotherhood groups and the other political Islam movements in Egypt and the other countries in the region), over a period of several decades to sponsor and encourage the Islamic currents and radicalism, whether by US secret agreements with them or perhaps by manipulating them as well, so that (the United States of America will use them later in its cold war against China ideologically).

  Perhaps the visit of Chinese Foreign Minister “Wang Yi” to the Middle East in March 2021, who summarized his trip in several words, concerning the Chinese response in the Middle East to the policy of American alliances and polarization, by asserting that:

 “China and the countries agreed on the need to respect sovereign independence and national dignity for all countries, and to promote independent and diversified avenues of development”

   The official Chinese media also supported the speech of its Chinese Foreign Minister, “Wang Yi” and his assurances to all countries in the Middle East region, by confirming that:

 “It was agreed to oppose interference in the internal affairs of the other countries and slander others under the guise of human rights and the protection of the international system, so that the United Nations “UN” would be the core of the international order based on international law, pluralism, fairness and international justice”

   The analyses and the main visions of the Chinese think tanks, which are considered that: the failure of the United States of America to invite the countries of the region to the conference of democracies in the world is (the beginning of the “Joe Biden’s administration” leaving the Middle East for China).

  So, the logic results for the American provocation to the Middle East region, according to the Chinese way of thinking, represents in: (deepening China’s relations with the Middle East countries outside the scope of trade should worry the United States of America), especially since the administration of US President “Joe Biden” has recently taken steps to reduce interest in the region, thus opening the door to Chinese hegemony in accordance with the American vision.

   And perhaps in my viewpoint that (the Conference of American Democracies is the beginning of the American vacuum in favor of China and Russia), which is the same as what was confirmed by a former senior official in American national security, and a close advisor to President “Joe Biden” in a report published in the “American Politico Newspaper”, confirming it frankly by saying:

  “If you were to rank the regions that “Biden” considers a priority, the Middle East is not among the top three. Because, the main top priorities are: the Asia-Pacific region, then Europe, and the Western Hemisphere, and this reflects a bipartisan consensus that the issues of our interest has changed with the return of the great-power competition with China and Russia”

   Hence, we conclude, that with China competing for more international (militarily, economically, technologically and politically) influence, to become the largest power in the world by 2049, according to its stated strategy. So, here we find that (the Middle East is likely to become decisive, whether the United States of America prioritizes it or not).

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

modi bangladesh modi bangladesh
South Asia2 hours ago

Fifty Years OF India-Bangladesh Ties: Sky’s The Limit

Bangladesh and India are two neighboring countries of South Asia and these two countries have historically had very close relations....

South Asia6 hours ago

Pakistan slips on a slippery slope of religious militancy

Pakistani political and military leaders have vowed to eradicate ultra-conservative religious extremism that drove a mob to torture, brutally lynch...

Development8 hours ago

Report Underlines Reforms to Support Fiscal Federalism, Green Growth in Nepal

Nepal has made significant strides in implementing fiscal federalism while key reforms are needed to support fiscal sustainability and Nepal’s...

Africa10 hours ago

The UK’s travel ban: Why Nigerians must look towards their leaders

Once again Nigeria’s image problem rears its ugly head, only this time, it has to do with how little care...

Development12 hours ago

Philippines: Boosting Private Sector Growth Can Strengthen Recovery, Create More Jobs

Rebounding from a deep contraction in 2020, the Philippine economy is forecast to grow 5.3 percent this year before accelerating...

International Law14 hours ago

The crisis of international law

The idea of promoting the human rights agenda in the image and likeness of the Western countries’ principles – as...

Eastern Europe16 hours ago

Lithuania: pensioners get ready for death

Main attention of the Lithuanian media has been focused on migrant crises and security issues for several weeks. This problem...

Trending