Until recently, many, including myself, believed that Yemen's plight, plagued by its elite, was confined to the triangle of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, each with its own agenda to impose on the country and its people. However, it seems we were slightly mistaken. A roadmap agreement to end the war in Yemen was scheduled to be signed in mid-December last year. However, as I mentioned in a previous article on this platform, "the US administration postponed the signing date for calculations of profit, loss, and blackmail concerning what is happening in Gaza." This turned out to be entirely true. Instead of restraining Israel in its war on Gaza, and thereby revealing the Houthis' exploitation of the Gaza conflict to prolong their own war, the US rushed to establish an air bridge to support Israel with all kinds of deadly weapons and engaged with the Houthis in confrontations in the Red Sea under the pretext of safeguarding international trade. This action somewhat increased the Houthis' popularity both domestically and internationally.
A Diabolical Operation
The glaring American contradiction is evident in linking the cessation of the war in Yemen to the cessation of Houthi attacks against those they accuse of supporting Israel, while separating the Gaza war from events in the Red Sea. Let us set aside our intense disagreements with the Houthis for a moment. At the same time, American and international officials, as well as independent observers, confirm the close correlation between the war on Gaza and the Houthi attacks. This perspective is further validated by the American handling of pro-Palestinian students in American universities, where it has conveniently forgotten its slogans about human rights, freedom of expression, press freedom, individual freedom, and the freedom of peoples. This approach is no different from how America deals with any state it considers deviant and undemocratic.
Moreover, the postponement of signing the roadmap has emerged as a blatant American obstruction to peace in Yemen. The United States will not permit the war to end unless the Houthis cease their attacks, and it will not allow humanitarian aid to enter Yemen without that precondition. The U.S. employs the same rhetoric regarding the conditions for ending the war in Gaza. From the outset, it has been evident that it is Washington, not Israel, that is waging the war in Gaza. However, we were not as certain of its role in Yemen, beyond acting as a mediator.
The U.S. announcement of its conditions for ending the war in Yemen has upended our understanding of the conflict. It has become clear that the war in our country is not a regional triangle but rather a straight line between two points: Washington and Tehran, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE serving merely as subcontractors. Otherwise, they would not have acquiesced to the American approach to resolving the Yemeni issue. The nature of the local parties' relationships with each other and others, along with the unbalanced international Arab relations, has played a central role in this chronic subjugation.
What is Being Prepared for Yemen?
After Washington turned peace in Yemen into a hostage, it began preparing for a diabolical operation aimed at increasing tensions among anti-Houthi factions. This is not out of any affection for the Houthis, in my opinion, but rather to shuffle all the cards and create a murky situation conducive to initiating prolonged conflicts under different pretexts than the current ones.
The United States requires victims in our country to advance its interests and prevail, but the true danger does not reside here if we comprehend the logic of American hegemonic policy. The true threat lies in the local and regional contexts that uncritically embrace American narratives, with all their flaws, and regard them as irrefutable truths.
During the youth revolution, many were inclined to have their own presidential candidate, only to be surprised when the individual in question let them down. He even declared that the issue of power had been placed in the hands of then-Ambassador Gerald Feierstein, who acted at his discretion thereafter.
Who Can Revive the Dead Bones?
Actually, it doesn't require much effort to understand the leanings of the two institutes, Democratic and Republican, as they not only closely align with their respective parties but also carry their political and geostrategic orientations onto the global stage. We won't delve here into the nature of the dominant forces within these parties or the sources of funding for these organizations to avoid prolonging the discussion.
“All Yemeni parties, whether collectively or individually, across the spectrum, are experiencing a cognitive stagnation, some of which have been in this state for decades, while others have succumbed to it amidst the years of conflict. This stagnation has rendered them unresponsive, as neither the clamor of war nor the scent of blood mixed with the smell of gunpowder has managed to elicit even the slightest reaction from them.”
In this context, the Italian journalist Roberto Vivaldelli reports that the leaders of the three organizations disclosed to the U.S. Congress the tactics employed by America to intervene in the internal affairs of other countries, indicating that all their activities primarily aim to support political activists who share their vision in forming new movements within their countries to overthrow governments hostile to America. American apprehensions are centered on thwarting the rise or continuity of regimes divergent from or opposed to American interests, leaving us to anticipate the nature of regimes that may stand in opposition.
Blood and Gunpowder
Thus, does America truly harbor affection for us? The stance on Israel indeed serves as the paramount determinant of the relationship with America. By nature, we, as individuals and societies, align with Palestinian and Arab Islamic rights, just as America, ideologically, aligns itself with Israel. Therefore, these three organizations are interconnected and intricately tied to Israel's interests and are unlikely to support the establishment of regimes that do not support with Israel, regardless of their democratic nature. Is that understood?"
On the other hand, Yemeni political parties, encompassing all ideological spectrums—Islamist factions with their diverse orientations, nationalist groups with their branches and chauvinistic and populist tendencies, leftist parties with their varied theories, and the power center parties characterized by tribal, military, and oligarchic inclinations—are all collectively and individually undergoing a state of cognitive decline. Some have been in this state for decades, while others have succumbed to it amidst the years of conflict. Due to this state of stagnation, despite the tumult of war, the smell of blood mixed with gunpowder, the sight of bodies felled by murder, bombing, and sniping, and the tragedy of hunger, disease, and fear, none of these have managed to elicit even the slightest response from them or any reaction, leaving us questioning if they are still alive.
All these forces, whether in periods of activity or dormancy, along with all the armed and demobilized groups and movements, have remained distant and disparate without any unity or cohesion, unaffected by the performances of singers, orators, or even lamentations and wails. These powers avoid communication with each other, and wish nothing but disappearance upon one another, along with women and children. Yet, we see surprisingly, at the mere signal from the lowest figure at the democratic institute, 30 disparate and conflicting movements, parties, and factions converge under one banner. Why does this happen? What power or influence drives this unity? What about ours? How do they govern?
Besides, the history of the Democratic Institute's activities in our country has not resulted in the reform or democratization of the former regime, nor has it facilitated the establishment of another democratic regime. Instead, its efforts have primarily focused on training the existing regime in areas unrelated to nation-building or development. Interestingly, we have not heard about the existence of the Republican Institute alongside the Democratic Institute in our country. Could it be that they have divided spheres of influence?
The vision has not yet become clear, but what is absolutely certain is that we are on the brink of repositioning and constructing a new framework for the conflict.
