Even those who currently lead a political movement against unity have indeed been successful in portraying the event in a negative light in the minds of the public. They have linked it to the various challenges faced by the people of the southern provinces. However, it is undeniable that on May 22nd - thirty-four years ago today - it evoked profound emotions and engendered widespread hopes for a unified country amidst a difficult international landscape. During that time, major nations were experiencing fragmentation due to the collapse of Eastern Europe, which had long been united under a powerful socialist bloc since the mid-1940s. The Yemeni Democratic Republic, the counterpart in the unity, had been an integral part of the vital relationships established over more than two decades, shaped by the bipolarity witnessed during the Cold War era.
Before Yemeni unity became an influential factor in the thinking and literature of the national and political movements, it worked under its banners at various stages of transformation over a span of forty years. It was originally a complete embodiment of the intertwined geography and blended culture in the consciousness of the population throughout Yemen's diverse history (ancient, medieval, and contemporary). The notion that the ruling powers in the north and south sought unity as a means of escape in a turbulent world, at the beginning of the 1990s, is one of the politically loaded interpretations of the event and the storms that surrounded it. Unity was a central slogan that generations were raised upon in schools, universities, and political circles, akin to the slogan raised by the Yemeni Socialist Party: "Let us struggle to defend the Yemeni revolution, implement the five-year plan, and achieve Yemeni unity."
In fact, the significance of unity in Yemen goes beyond mere political rhetoric. It represents a collective aspiration to overcome historical divisions, forge a shared identity, and build a stronger and more prosperous nation. While there may be differing opinions and challenges along the way, it is important to acknowledge the deep-rooted motivations and the complex historical context that led to the pursuit of unity in Yemen.
Perhaps the hasty emotional rush to merge the two states without adequately addressing the inherent contradictions within the power structures had a profound impact on the eventual collapse that followed. This impulsive approach provided an opening for tribal power structures, with their intricate web of political, religious, and regional alliances, to exploit the situation and pursue their own vested interests of ownership and control.
The alliance formed by the central power in Sana'a indeed sparked a series of uprisings that unfolded over a span of twenty years. However, it is important to recognize that these uprisings were not solely initiated by the central power but involved various actors with different motivations and agendas. The aim of these uprisings was to eliminate the communist regime from southern Yemen, a goal that was considered sacred by those involved. Besides, fatwas were utilized to garner support and legitimize the battle against the communist regime. This ideological framing provided a moral justification for the actions taken by the governing partner of the central power. The conflict commenced with a systematic dismantling of party and state structures to weaken their influence, leading to a series of political crises.
One significant event during this period was the overthrow of the Covenant and Agreement document, which had been signed by all parties in Amman, Jordan, on February 20th, 1994. This marked a turning point as it was followed by attacks on camps affiliated with the party in the northern provinces. These events further intensified the political turmoil and deepened the divisions within Yemen.
Indeed, the unity of Yemen, despite its political complexities and the challenges associated with power and influence, has reached a troubled state. However, the underlying need for unity as a significant national concept to counteract the perils of fragmentation and weakness remains prevalent among many Yemenis. It can be strengthened under favorable conditions and improved circumstances, at the very least through genuine power-sharing, resource allocation, addressing grievances, and seeking reparation.
The invasion of the southern provinces was subject to the approval of Saudi Arabia and the United States. Both parties imposed certain conditions that the authorities in Sana'a had to meet. One of these conditions was the destruction of the Soviet weapons arsenal and the weapons belonging to their eastern allies, which were stored in the warehouses of the southern forces. These weapons had been accumulated over many years as a result of security and military cooperation with countries in the Eastern Bloc.
Truthfully, the demand to destroy the weapons arsenal was driven by concerns over regional stability and the desire to limit the influence of foreign powers in Yemen. As a result, the accumulation of Soviet weapons and those of their eastern allies in the southern forces' warehouses posed a potential threat to the overall security and stability of the region. By dismantling this arsenal, the Saudi and American governments aimed to reduce the military capabilities of the southern forces. This was seen as a necessary step to prevent the internal conflicts within Yemen from spiraling into larger regional confrontations. The fear was that these weapons could fall into the wrong hands or be used to fuel further violence and instability.
Thus, the objective was to ensure that the internal dynamics of Yemen remained contained and that the country could move towards a more stable and peaceful future. By removing the stockpile of weapons, the hope was to reduce the potential for armed conflict and create an environment where political dialogue and negotiations could be prioritized.
Definitely, a careful examination of the conditions reveals that the conspiracy against unity in Yemen was not solely driven by internal factors. The authorities in Sana'a, with their vast alliances spanning tribal, religious, and political factions, were not the sole instigators. There was also a desire from international and regional actors to weaken the fledgling state.
The authority of Saleh and his allies played a compliant role in this endeavor. Their focus was on acquiring and maintaining control, rather than working towards a grand national project. This is evident in the fact that public sector institutions, important economic spaces, and valuable land and maritime resources all fell under the ownership of the war alliance and those with influence within it. The Al-Ahmar family, with their branches in Sanhan and Asaimat, along with their close allies in the military, security, and religious leadership of the Islah Party, became the beneficiaries of these assets. Their acquisition of power and resources further highlighted the self-serving nature of the authorities in Sana'a and their alliances. This pattern of control and ownership by select groups undermined the establishment of a unified and inclusive Yemen. Instead of working towards a common national project, the focus was on personal gain and consolidation of power within certain circles. This further contributed to the fragmentation and divisions within the country.
Undeniably, much has transpired since the summer of the 1994 war, and the grievances of the population, whose rights were unjustly seized, have only grown. The authorities in their arrogance paid no heed to the voices calling for the rectification of unity; instead, they chose to vilify and marginalize those voices. However, as these calls evolved into peaceful protests in early January 2007, the regime intensified its repression of the symbols of this movement. But when these protests transformed into a potent street movement, the authorities attempted to appease the situation with superficial initiatives.
Accordingly, the demands for secession had already found resonance in the protest slogans before this movement gained momentum. Since the Houthi war alliance invaded the southern provinces in early 2015, seeking to subjugate them using similar tactics employed in the 1994 war, the situation has taken a drastic turn. The secessionist movement has gained significant traction, bolstered by the mounting sense of injustice and oppression.
As a matter of fact, the events that have unfolded in Yemen since the 1994 war have profoundly reshaped the political landscape and the aspirations of the people. The authorities' dismissive attitude towards the calls for rectifying the unity project and their failure to address the people's grievances have only fueled the demand for secession. Besides, the Houthi incursion into the southern provinces has further amplified these sentiments and solidified the secessionist movement's stronghold.
the concept of unity, with all its political challenges and the pursuit of power and influence, has completely faltered. However, as a grand national idea to counter the dangers of fragmentation and weakness, the need for unity still persists among many Yemenis. It can be reinforced under favorable conditions and improved circumstances, at the very least through genuine power and resource-sharing, addressing grievances and seeking restitution, and decentralizing governance.
Undoubtedly, he unity of Yemen continues to be a cherished goal for the majority of Yemenis, despite the current state of disarray. To achieve true unity and overcome the existing divisions, it is imperative to establish a genuine partnership in power-sharing and resource allocation.
Consequently, addressing the grievances of the population is a crucial step towards fostering unity. This entails acknowledging the harm that has been inflicted upon individuals and communities and providing reparations for the injustices they have suffered. By addressing these grievances, we can begin to heal the wounds and build trust among the different factions of Yemeni society.
Moreover, decentralizing the administration can play a pivotal role in creating a more inclusive and effective governance structure. Empowering local authorities and communities to have a say in decision-making processes and resource allocation can help bridge the gaps and ensure that all regions of Yemen have a stake in the country's future.
Frankly, it is only through genuine partnership, addressing grievances, and decentralizing power that we can pave the way towards a unified Yemen even that the process will not be easy and will require the collective efforts of all Yemenis, but the aspiration for unity remains strong and is essential for the stability and prosperity of our nation.
In conclusion, the challenges facing Yemen are complex, but the idea of unity still holds value as a means to overcome these challenges so is it important to strive for a united Yemen that upholds the interests and aspirations of all its people, and to create the necessary conditions for its realization. A united Yemen can only thrive when the voices and needs of all its people are heard and respected. By embracing unity, Yemen can harness the collective strength and potential of its diverse population, leading to a more stable and prosperous future for all.
