We could have been celebrating Unity Day today, as, for example, the Germans do. Today, Germany is the largest economy in Europe, and it is the one that leads the European locomotive, which is being tossed by structural, political, and racist issues and by fierce winds as a result of the sweeping changes in the world. However, Yemen is currently a hotbed of poverty, hunger, disease, and fear. It is a cocktail of wars with multiple names, slogans, merchants, and pawns captive to the past.
Between the Yemeni and German unity, a few days, not exceeding 75 days. Nevertheless, the Germanic tribes did not set out to restore their past even before "Bismarck", but rather the German state (the institution) set out to bring the level of the eastern citizens closer to the western ones. While the state of the Yemeni tribes rushed to turn the south into another (Hodeidah), as a nearest description for it. Consequently, here, the difference between the minds of the statesmen and the minds of the non-statesmen is manifested.
The least that can be said about our situation is that we have become addicted to a life of tragedies, coup, and pillage. Furthermore, wars are our achievements, in which no one can compete with us. Fighting and triumph are our heritage, and no one will dispute it with us. Besides, we are always good at naming things with strange names and raising even more strange slogans for them.
Further, we killed the republic and raised the slogan "the republic or death", only to discover the tragedy afterwards, and so we did the same thing with unity and raised the slogan "unity or death", Then unity died by an actor. Thus, again, we began to mourn our luck. Why not unity and life?
"Unity was baptized with blood." Oh my God! Is it possible that the blood could not coagulate and continued to flow until today. Actually, everyone is only good at relying on the domination and triumph , when the state is just an idea and the tribe and its alliances are a ramified reality that transcends the boundaries of the place and reasonable perceptions.
Falsifying Consciousness
School historians go to the assertion that the reunification of Yemen occurred twenty-three times, including the unity of May 22, 1990, whereas critics did not raise the question of how many times the reunification occurred but rather, why did that happen? Why did not the frequency of the state and the succession of rulers continue while it was unified? Or: Why were the emerging mini-states not consolidated into one rather than being replaced by another?
Moreover, those historians try to falsify people's consciousness, as if they are talking about one subject and one country known by its name and borders, its capital, and its currency, which is repeated every time.
On the other hand, Egypt has been ruled by more than 150 pharaohs, and apart from talking about the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt once, there was no talk of reunification; rather, the state has remained the same until today. Besides, the Egyptian state has expanded beyond its borders a lot, but it has preserved its lands and has not been torn apart into mini-states.
What unified homeland are we talking about while strangers are asking us to release ourselves from captivity? Isn't that "moral degradation," as Al-Nu'man said? The negotiation of the exchange of citizens who were pushed into the war due to poverty and the loss of rights is an indicator of "the lowest level that the Yemenis have reached and their extremism in enmity and hostility".
Nonetheless, talking about the natural Yemen, basically, is talking about a very vast geographical area called South Arabia, extending from Aden to Dhafar in Oman and from the Arabian Sea to the borders of the Levant. But this situation no longer exists and cannot be merely contemplated in the present era.
In the aforementioned region, indeed, great states arose, such as Sheba, Ma’een, Himyar, Hadramout, Awsan, Qataban, and others. However, it is known historically that the emergence of these states was not a succession of the ruling classes and a transition from one phase to another in the form, construction, and political system of the state, but rather that these states were established at the expense of each other so that one could eliminate the other, and so on and so forth; the process was repeated over and over again. Besides, with the emergence of these states, they did not necessarily cover the entire area referred to, but rather the area was shrinking and the borders were changing constantly.
Even the state of Asaad Al-Kamil, whose tales are mixed with many legends, did not last as a unified state for more than fifty years, which is the period of Asaad Al-Kamil's reign, and then it disintegrated after his death at the hands of his heirs.
Likewise, during the era of the Prophet Mohammad, the region was not one state but rather several states affiliated with Medina, later the capital of the caliphate. Thus, during the subsequent periods of the fall of the Islamic State, many countries and states emerged, that expressed the aspirations of the new princes and the weakness of the old princes. Further, the appearances and disappearances were based on the strength and ambition of the newcomer. That is, none of the states appeared and did not include new regions under their control without violence and looting. Then come those who tell us that unity is a constant historical process and a distinctive feature.
Constantly, new countries appear with new capitals and new names that are disconnected from and hostile to what preceded them. Hence, it is possible to refer to books such as Al-Wasi’i, Al-Shamahi, and others.
Arguing about the social, economic, and even cultural relations between people in these territories and regions is not enough evidence of unity as much as it is evidence of the need for mutual benefits, just as is the case between all countries. Also, what is said to be a social and economic unity is nothing more than evidence of the weakness of the political systems of those countries and their inability to impose their influence outside their borders. Consequently, the other mini-states formed a safe haven for those fleeing from this or that ruler.
May 22: The Exception
The unity of May 22, 1990, was an exception in history. It is the only time that two known parties agreed on a name, borders, and vital area to merge into one state. Where it was agreed to call it the "Republic of Yemen" instead of their previous names, and this had not happened previously or in any way.
On the other hand, it came to the people's minds that the new state had declared a break with the evils of the distant and recent past, and that the slogans of the two previous regimes had fallen from the hands of their carriers and were replaced by the slogans of construction, partnership, and the future.
However, it was just a pipe dream. So soon, the slogans of takfir "unbelief" and the assassination swords were raised to murder many heads, and then the people remembered that they were "the possessors of strength and possessors of mighty prowess," but they did not remember at that time that Bilqis did not rely on those whom she consulted because she had the wisdom to overcome that moment, and in the midst of that, they forgot all the incidents of history. Besides, the days confirmed that they do not belong to those people, and their chief is not Bilqis but another person who is not related to her.
On April 27, 1994, the war was declared, which was also dated from the same pre-prepared barricade. The war reversed everything people dreamed of, including freedom, hope, and reasons for the future. Subsequently, the unity has become blood-soaked and murdered by the pillage; however, they are the possessors of strength and mighty prowess! But not without personal motivators. The torrents of bloodshed have failed to create a stable and rising state.
The war triggered a war and various wars, and the pain gave way to other pains that were more painful. A new reality has been left behind with the requirements of war, blood, and destruction. The outputs are similar to the inputs, and the result is justified by the cause.
Likewise, the same people are crying today over the ruins of unity that they buried it one summer, and they have become dispersed in distant exiles, reminding you of the people whom “Hadrian” abused and tortured, so they retired to the shores of the Tigris.
Most of them are hung in the trap that they made with their own hands. It is too late to say that solving problems is based on understanding the causes, not the results. My friend asked: Which republic are they crying over today, the Republic of September, the Republic of November, or the Republic of October 1977? They certainly do not cry over the unity of May 22, but rather over the loss of the gains of the 1994 war. They do not feel that they have lost anything in this eight-year war; it is only we who always lose.
Only Mustafa Al-Numan almost remained in the spirit of asceticism, far from those traps. Therefore, he is the only one who has a rational discourse that represents the reality on the ground. Besides, he is almost the only one among them who did not say that the 1994 war was due to the Albeid's declaration of "disengagement", and almost the only one who remembers that this declaration came 24 days after the declaration of war from Al-Sabeen Square. Moreover, he is the only one who did not want us to be prisoners of war with each other.
What unified homeland are we talking about while strangers are asking us to release ourselves from captivity? Isn't that "moral degradation," as Al-Nu'man said? The negotiation of the exchange of citizens who were pushed into the war due to poverty and the loss of rights is an indicator of "the lowest level that the Yemenis have reached and their extremism in enmity and hostility". He is the only one who considers what it means to release everyone and to be free. We, then, do not like Al-Nu’man, just as we didn’t like Al-Jawi, Ibn Shamlan, Al-Baradouni, Ibn Ghanem, Ibn Humam, and Al-Rabadi before that, many of whom we did not like!
The month of May returns, grieving as usual, not for itself but for the hopes that have been swept away by the triumph mentality. All the months and days, through their experiences and repetition, realize that crude, irritable, and unbridled power can destroy everything, but it is not capable of building a state. More than that, it is incapable of unity in its sublime human concept, but it is more capable of brutality. You have lost unity in Sana'a. So, why are you looking for it in others?
From the Beginning of the Line, We Say:
Others have no time for our troubles. Besides, the world is preoccupied with what is more important to it than us. It is preoccupied with existential struggle and domination. Thus, we are just a detail among many unimportant details.
Dr. Ahmed Sinan
