The bitter cost of fighting in Yemen and the urgent need for a united stand
Twelve years ago, when I lived
in Aden, protests by the Southern Movement were a regular occurrence — and with
equal regularity, they were brutally suppressed. The complaint of the Movement
was this: that the unification of Yemen in 1990 had been carried out with a
promise of parity between North and South, but this had failed to materialize.
When I left Yemen — young, naive and overconfident of my
analytical prowess — I predicted a civil war within three years. But, like
many, I was thinking about a re-run of the civil war of 1994: a north-south
clash over the steamrollering of the promises made four years earlier. The
South lost that one, and northern dominance of the economy and government of
Yemen grew apace.
But while the troubles that began in 2011 were not triggered
by the Southern Movement, the legacy of 21 years of broken promises is hard to
erase. It is that legacy that we have seen played out in blood on the streets
of Aden this week.
Once again, we can only wonder what might have happened if only
the transitional process that started in 2011 had been left to run its course.
The National Dialogue was intended, through democratic means, to settle the
future of Yemen and address the grievances that built up over the three decades
of Ali Abdullah Saleh’s rule. That hope of resolving the southern issue was
taken away by the Houthi coup in 2014. Now, with five years of bitter fighting
under their belts, certain separatist factions in the South have decided they
have waited long enough.
The cost to Yemen is bitter and costly enough as a result of
the war currently being fought, the lives that have been lost and the legacies
of the conflict: fields of landmines, devastated infrastructure and broken
communities. We can only hope for the future of Yemen to be placed in the hands
of its people.
But any just resolution is even further off when there is war
within a war — and historical experience demonstrates that, in the words of
President Lincoln: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
Although in retrospect the achievement of victory in war
seems obvious, in the moment it is not. While the anti-Houthi forces argue and
fight over control of this city or that, the Houthis themselves have not been
defeated. The squabbling factions are like the owners of a stolen cow arguing
about who should drink the milk. Meanwhile, the outside world watches in
bewilderment. The sterling efforts of Yemenis to convince the world that they
are engaged in a just war against the forces of theocratic tyranny are dealt blow
after blow by incidents such as these.
No one disputes the fact that the legitimate government of
Yemen does not have a perfect record. Nor is there any dispute that the
grievances felt by those parts of South Yemen represented by the Southern
Transition Council (STC) are genuine. In some parts of the South, including
Aden, there persists a security challenge from groups such as ISIS and
Al-Qaeda, as well as from bandits.
Regrettably, in a speech on Sunday the president of the STC
appeared to blame terrorist attacks — and even a Houthi attack that killed a
senior military officer — on the government. This is not going to solve any of
the issues facing Yemen, North or South. Security will only be restored to
territory liberated or secured from the Houthis if all of the factions are
working together.
While Aden suffers, both sides have appealed to Saudi Arabia
to mediate. Given the Kingdom’s own strong interest in securing the defeat of
the Houthis — a course of action to which both the government and the STC
remain committed — this commitment to engage in mediation is a positive sign of
the continued focus by the factions on the true goal.
Civil war is never simple — there are too many competing
interests and desires within a country. This is not only obvious from recent
experiences in many countries in the Middle East and North Africa, but from
historical experience around the globe. Ego and vanity lead to courses of
action against one’s allies in ways that can prove deeply harmful to the cause.
Being on the side of right does not guarantee victory; only unity, sound
strategy, and discipline can achieve that. Fragmentation and factionalism not
only make victory unlikely, they are likely to extend the war and exacerbate
the suffering of the Yemeni people.
There is one goal that matters in Yemen: to demonstrate
conclusively that private interests cannot succeed by force of arms. The
Houthis’ mistake was to believe that their own factional desires justified
starting a war. They must be shown the error of their ways. When that has
happened, Yemen will require a new political settlement. The years of war since
2014 have changed the country; the sound conclusions of the National Dialogue
Conference will need to be revisited.
There will be ample opportunities for the STC to make its
case at that point. There will also be opportunities for new elections,
renewing the legitimacy of the national government. But Yemen will only reach
that point if the forces fighting the Houthis remain united. In the flush of
victory over the Houthis, space will be created for a generous and imaginative
national settlement.
I hope that the words of the STC leadership, and of Yemen’s
government, supporting Saudi Arabia’s mediation will be matched by actions that
restore unity. Because that is the only way that Yemen’s war will be won.