It’s time for the international community to stop ‘recognising’ Hadi’s ‘government’

Omar Ahmed

Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, President of Yemen [z_sattam/Twitter]

In spite of having no substantial physical political presence in Yemen, and no formal armed forces on the ground, the media is insistent on running with the same, tired expression of “the internationally recognised legitimate government” of the fugitive president, Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, who has apparently been running the country from the Saudi capital, Riyadh, since he fled Yemen in 2015.

It has now been over a month since the signing of the Riyadh Agreement, which was hailed as ushering in peace in the south, not only among the warring factions of Hadi’s forces, which largely consists of Islamist, Islah militia and Sudanese mercenaries against the Security Belt forces, who are aligned with southern separatists, the Southern Transitional Council (STC), but it was also hoped to simmer down the tension between the patrons of these two parties, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) respectively, both partners in the anti-Houthi coalition in the north, but backing opposing sides in the south.

No longer ‘Iranian proxies’

It was also a month ago that I argued that this agreement will fall flat in its objectives, namely due to the fact that Hadi doesn’t have any concrete authority in Yemen, and the real political legitimacy lies with the National Salvation Government (NSG), which has been ruling the capital Sanaa since 2014. Its power-base was formed from of an alliance between the Ansar Allah movement, the Yemeni military and remnants of the General People’s Congress political party – however the same news outlets who are trying to convince us of the “internationally recognised” government, are the same ones peddling the misleading narrative, that the NSG are merely “Houthi rebels” or “Iranian proxies”, following Tehran’s orders.

Houthis patrol around after the clashes between Houthis and Former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s supporters took place in Sanaa, Yemen on 5 December 2017 [Mohammed Hamoud/Anadolu Agency]

Essentially, this agreement stalled the inevitability that the Saudis, and the wider international community, will have to accept the reality that the NSG (“Houthis”) are the legitimate government in Yemen. I am using the past-tense here because the agreement is void and no longer exists – it was signed on 5 November and included a 30-day deadline in forming a new cabinet of 24 members, equally split from the north and south. I concluded with the revelation that the Saudis had acknowledged that they had opened channels of communication with the Houthis.

In fact, a few days following the signing of the accord, the UAE minister of state for Foreign Affairs, Anwar Gargash, conceded that the Houthis will have a role in post-war Yemen. In more recent developments, Saudi foreign minister, Adel Al-Jubeir, has suggestively indicated that the Houthis are in fact, a legitimate entity, stating “all Yemenis, including the Houthis have a role in the future of Yemen.”

It would now appear that the Trump administration has also done an ‘about-face’ on its policy on Yemen, having once framed the conflict as being an Iranian proxy war, they are now trying to downplay Iran’s involvement. Brian Hook, the US special representative for Iran, went from declaring in September that Iran was “controlling and deploying” the Houthis as a “terror front”, to now stating that “Iran clearly does not speak for the Houthis.” I mentioned back in September how this Iranian connection has been exaggerated and misrepresented by the media. One needs only to refer to a 2015 article which stated that Iran, for example, had in fact warned the Zaydi movement against taking over Sanaa. Indeed, the Houthis, as with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, are actually acting independently, albeit with assistance from Tehran. 

Who speaks for the south?

The Riyadh Agreement was always problematic from the outset, because although on paper it was plausible, the reality on the ground, in particular in the interim capital city of Aden, was another thing entirely. There are constant reports of violent clashes between Hadi’s mercenaries and the southern separatist forces. Additionally, there has been a steady increase in assassinations across the city, with the STC hinting liability with Hadi’s associates. Hampering conciliatory efforts, the STC are also refusing to vacate the presidential palace in the city. There are also reports that the former president of the Democratic People’s Republic of Yemen, Ali Nasser Mohammed, has warned the STC against plans to seize his home in Aden province, captured by the separatists last July.

It is important to recognise that the STC does not speak for all southerners, nor for the Southern Movement. There is the Southern National Salvation Council (SSC) based in Mahrah, who not only oppose both Saudi and Emirati interference in Yemen, but had opposed the Riyadh Agreement from its inception, noting that “the agreement gives legitimacy to regional militias affiliated abroad,” with reference to the STC.

The director of Human Rights for Yemen, Kim Sharif, explained to MEMO that the SSC is composed of the “original secessionists” and that the STC are widely regarded as a “traitor entity” by most southerners, as they are a party formed by the UAE who are using and exploiting the memory of the South Yemen state.

Illegitimacy of Hadi vs legitimacy of the NSG

Sharif agrees that the Hadi government lacks legitimacy, because following the election where he stood as the sole candidate, he was appointed as president for a transitional period of two years as part of the Gulf Initiative back in February 2012, reluctantly accepted by many, to avoid further bloodshed. Under the initiative, elections were to be held within the transitional period.

However, this failed to materialise and according to Sharif, under Hadi assassinations and terrorist attacks began to increase “funded by the Saudis,” and with a reliance on the Islah Party militia, who have close ties with General Mohsen Al-Ahmar, the vice president whose links to Al-Qaeda are well-documented. Hadi formerly resigned from the presidency in 2015, but has held onto the position ever since, giving him “zero legitimacy”. “There’s no such thing as an ‘internationally recognised government’ under international law. This is sheer abuse of the terms of the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations and is a totally unacceptable trespass on the sovereignty of the state of Yemen,” Sharif continued.

Meanwhile, with regards to the legitimacy of the National Salvation Government based in Sanaa, Sharif described the 2014 takeover within the context of the failure by Hadi to carry out elections as per his mandate. Additionally, under International Customary Law, whomever takes control of the capital of any country is considered the “de facto” government. In order for this to be ratified, the government has to become “de jure”. Sharif argues that such a government must first follow an “internal legislation process”, which the Sanaa government has done by preserving national institutions, creating the Supreme Council, which includes all political parties including southern secessionists and operates within the existing constitution.

Furthermore, it is the Yemeni armed forces who are subservient to the NSG, in addition to the “Popular Committee” (Houthi fighters), who are the ones defending the nation against foreign aggression enacted by the Saudi-led coalition. These points and the fact that the NSG entered into the “Tribal Honour Agreement 2015” with all tribes, given that tribal rule still plays a vital role in Yemeni politics, ensures that the NSG based in Sanaa are the legitimate government in Yemen.

Although a southerner, Sharif herself is supportive of the NSG and AnsarAllah, as they have a common goal in liberating Yemen from the foreign aggression and occupation. The ultimate aim being “uniting all factions in the south with a view of freeing Yemen from all foreign occupation.”  She is confident that this movement will succeed “in partnership with our brothers and sisters in the north.”

International recognition

The National Salvation Government is not only arguably the legitimate government of Yemen. The Yemeni armed forces and its alliance with AnsarAllah has proven that they are indeed the most powerful entity in the country, with an ever-developing arsenal, they have recently announced an improved air defence system, capable of “neutralising” coalition aircraft up to a projected 90 per cent in the year ahead, which is significant as according to Yemeni military expert, Brigadier General Aziz Rashid, the coalition depends on aircraft for 85 per cent of its operations. They have shot down several drones in the past two weeks, in addition to an Apache helicopter belonging to the Saudis. Just today, at the time of writing, the Yemeni armed forces downed a Saudi spy plane over the Jizan region.

As the Riyadh Agreement gradually fades into obscurity, and the Saudis and its allies begin to sue for peace and pay for the damage that they caused, in the realisation that it is the Houthi government which is the legitimate power and authority in the country, it is high time that the international community start recognising this too, at the expense of the puppet government based in Riyadh headed by Hadi, who effectively has been held in captivity there and does not speak for the Yemeni people nor has control of the armed forces. Peace, stability and an end to the man-made humanitarian crisis is achievable with the help of this international community, who have been delusional for far too long.

As Yemen starves, billions in donor funds fill the coffers of international aid agencies (2)

The Yemeni Minister of Public Health and Population, Taha al-Mutawakel called on the United Nations and humanitarian organizations to clarify the fate of funds allocated to Yemen. Al-Mutawakel bemoaned how aid money has been squandered on cars and services instead of alleviating the sufferings of Yemenis.

Al-Mutawakel bemoaned how aid money has been squandered on cars and services instead of alleviating the sufferings of Yemenis. He said from inside the Sabeen Maternal Hospital in the capital Sana’a “Stop shedding tears for our children who get killed, whilst there is no credibility whatsoever in your international reports and they do not help assuage this tragic situation," adding " We are not demanding toys and video game consoles, but we are calling for incubators and other related devices to give children the right to life.”

The following is the second and concluding part of an article written by Yemeni journalist, Ahmed AbdulKareem, under the heading: "As Yemen starves, billions in donor funds fill the coffers of international aid agencies." The article was taken from the 'Mintpressnews.com.'

Yemen’s National Authority for the Management and Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Recovery (NAMCHA) said there has been a deliberate waste of humanitarian aid funds allocated to the people of Yemen which amounts to a total of $4.2 billion, despite the humanitarian needs the Yemeni people not being met in 2019.

The United Nations has admitted to some incidents of corruption by aid workers, including a case in which a dozen of its aid workers enriched themselves from the billions of dollars in donated aid flowing into the country as well as from financial mismanagement. 

In one particularly egregious case uncovered by the Associated Press, UN World Health Organization (WHO) employee Nevio Zagaria, an Italian doctor, arrived in Yemen in December 2016 after a four-year stint in the Philippines to lead the agency’s humanitarian efforts in Yemen. According to the AP’s investigation, the WHO’s Yemen office under Zagaria was riddled with corruption and nepotism.

Zagaria brought in junior staffers who worked with him in the Philippines and promoted them to high-salary posts that they were not qualified for. Two of them – a Filipino university student and a former intern, were given senior posts but their only role was to take care for Zagaria’s pet dog.

Even American organizations, whose work in Yemen carries an heir of exceptionalism since the United States is the largest single supplier of lethal weapons, information, and experts to the Saudi-led Coalition, has given Yemenis little more than crumbs. For example, in two projects implemented by American World Communities Organization, as well as a project from the American Mercy Corps, only 25 percent of aid went to people in need, while 75 percent went to the organizations and their workers.

The loss of donor funds by organizations is not without precedent. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) froze more than $239 million of funds intended for Syrian aid programs due to significant fraud after it investigated 25 reported cases, some two-thirds of which were directly related to outright theft and fraud. As in Yemen, most of the $5.5 billion in American aid was distributed through the United Nations and a host of partner organizations.

Areas along the frontline of Yemen’s ongoing war, such as the country’s western coast as well as border areas, are a priority for many relief organizations. According to local residents, yet those organizations often provide little in the way of humanitarian support and instead have been found to be gathering intelligence or recruiting new mercenaries on behalf of the Saudi-led coalition. Many relief agencies have paid huge sums of money to the heads of local tribes. Two Yemeni tribal leaders, known locally as sheikhs, told MintPress on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the subject, that they received payments from Mercy Core as an incentive to carry out secret tasks for the Coalition. The nature of those tasks was not revealed.

According to documents reviewed by MintPress and interviews with employees of relief organizations as well as eyewitnesses who spoke to MintPress, many organizations are working with groups classified by the United States as terrorists, including Ansar al-Sharia, a group affiliated with al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). For Example, the American Mercy Core contracted Ansar al-Sharia in Yemen’s Abyan Province through an unauthorized Somali merchant to supply the group with foodstuffs and money.

Last week, authorities in Sana’a detained a number of U.N. humanitarian workers accused of spying, including two Jordanians who have since been released. Authorities accuse UN relief organizations of funding and conspiring with intelligence services to secretly target Yemenis, along with importing expired drugs and withholding fuel shipments.

Jordan’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that two of its citizens conducting a humanitarian audit in Yemen were released and later flown home. The World Food Program, for its part, said that none of its workers were being held by authorities in Sana’a.

Amongst the largest donors and financiers of U.N relief organizations are the very same countries participating in the war on Yemen, led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and supported by the United States.

Most of these organizations’ workers have political loyalty to ousted President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, or to the UAE or Saudi Arabi.

As a result of the lack of neutrality of a number of organizations, many Yemenis have not only been denied humanitarian aid, the risk to aid workers working in the country has grown. Last week, UN Deputy Humanitarian Chief Ursula Mueller warned the Security Council that attacks on aid workers have escalated in Yemen.

A number of Yemenis that spoke to MintPress said that they are not receiving any humanitarian assistance. Fatima, a 45-year-old mother of four, said she had not received food or medicine from aid organizations in four years. Fatima suffers from inflammation of the spinal cord and relies on aid to get by. She asked “No organization has helped us, where does the money go?”

Yemenis activists say that relief organizations, including UN organizations, are making a fortune in Yemen, asking the UN and international agencies to provide financial reports on how hundreds of millions of dollars that have been poured into Yemen since 2015 have been spent.

For its part, Yemen’s National Authority for the Management and Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Recovery (NAMCHA) has called for the formation of an international committee to investigate the corruption of international organizations working in Yemen. However, the UN puts much of the blame on the mercenaries and coalition forces, saying they have diverted donated food, medicine, fuel and money from desperate people over the course of the country’s five-year war.

The UN accuses Mansur Hadi's forces and also coalition forces of corruption and stealing food and medicine for its own use. According to Transparency International, yet most of the money squandered during humanitarian operations has been lost in the financing of marginal projects, procurement, transport and the distribution of medicines, food, and building materials, responsibilities which lie exclusively with relief organizations. 

The corruption of international relief organizations, as well as the bias they seem to harbor, undermines the trust of Yemen’s civilians on multiple levels. War-weary people don’t trust aid agencies to provide assistance and local authorities don’t trust the principled rhetoric around impartiality. Ultimately, this leads to donors not trusting that their money will reach the people who need it most.

Will Riyadh end its invasion into Yemen?

By Farzad Farhadi

TEHRAN – A military coalition, led by Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the U.S., has launched a war against Yemen since March 26, 2015. The war has so far failed to meet its desired goals.

Along with the news about the Yemen war, borrowing a loan from banks around the world by Saudi Arabia has attracted the attention of observers.

In January 2018, Reuters quoted the Saudi debt management office as saying that Riyadh has asked banks for proposals to refinance its $10 billion international syndicated loan and to help the sovereign raise funds through other means.

The office said the refinancing of the loan, which was raised in 2016, will include a repricing of the facility and the extension of its maturity to 2023 from 2021.

The Saudi war against Yemen has caused a lot of military, political and economic pressure on Riyadh. According to media reports, due to the war, Saudi Arabia has lost all of its cash and non-cash reserves.

A way to take Riyadh out of Yemen quagmire

Saudi Arabia has been caught in the military, political and economic quagmire of the Yemen war. The war, which Mohammad bin Salman did not expect to last more than three years, has been raging for nearly five years and putting unbearable pressure on the Saudi economy. That is why Riyadh is looking for a way to take itself out of the trouble. Mahdi al-Mashat, chief of the Houthi political office, put forward the solution that the Saudis needed.
 
On September 20, al-Mashat announced a conditional ceasefire, calling on the coalition to halt the war and seize the opportunity of ceasefire. 

According to military experts, the Yemeni conditional peace plan was presented at a time when Yemen was at the height of its power, the most important proof of which was the strikes on the Aramco oil facilities. 

The strikes were so severe that prompted various reactions internationally.
 
The important point of the plan is that it was presented by the Supreme Political Council, which is currently the most powerful organization in Yemen.

The Saudis slowly seized the opportunity to get out of the Yemen deadlock. In the meanwhile, Muscat became a place for two sides involved in the war to reach an agreement.

Muscat, a host with a positive and effective role

Officials from both Yemen and Saudi Arabia told the Associated Press on November 13 that both sides are holding indirect, behind-the-scenes talks to end the devastating five-year war in Yemen.

The news agency said the negotiations are taking place with Oman, a Persian Gulf Arab country that borders both Yemen and Saudi Arabia, as mediator. 

It said Oman has positioned itself as a quiet mediator in the past and in a possible sign the back-channel talks could be stepping up, Saudi Deputy Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman arrived in Muscat on November 11.

It said the current talks focus on interim goals, such as re-opening Yemen’s main international airport in Sanaa, shut down by the Saudi-led coalition in 2016. According to AP, also under discussion is a buffer zone along the Yemen-Saudi border in areas under Houthi control.

However, the best solution for Saudi Arabia and the UAE is to take a serious step to stop the war. The release of 200 Yemeni captives by Saudi Arabia and the arrival of 128 of them is a promising move by Riyadh, which, if continued, can prepare the ground for ending war and easing Yemenis’ pain.

87 Muslim scholars call for complete boycott of the UAE

The 87 scholars stated also that the direct intervention and involvement of the UAE in conflicts around the world, including in countries like Yemen and Libya, have seen millions of casualties, displaced peoples, and the destruction of lands.

TMV TEAM

In a groundbreaking and inspiring move, 87 Muslim scholars from around the world have called on a complete boycott of the United Arab Emirates, urging especially business people to look elsewhere because of the UAE’s consistent involvement in war, corruption, and human rights abuses. The scholars, which include Libya’s Mufti Sheikh Al-Sadiq Al-Gharyani, stated:

This boycott call is driven by the direct intervention of the UAE in several Arab and Muslim countries like Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Kashmir and Uygurs in China. Intervening in those areas by flowing money and arms caused deaths and corruption among Muslims.”

Basing their boycott off of the hadith and sunnah of the Prophet that stated that the enemy of Muslims should be made weak economically in order to stop them from causing destruction and the death of innocents, this boycott hopes to encourage the boycott of businesses who operate and invest in Abu Dhabi. A significant amount of business money made in Abu Dhabi goes directly towards the funding of arms deals and war efforts, mainly in Yemen, and this boycott hopes to stop a large portion of this money flow.

The 87 scholars stated also that the direct intervention and involvement of the UAE in conflicts around the world, including in countries like Yemen and Libya, have seen millions of casualties, displaced peoples, and the destruction of lands. Calling these war crimes, the boycott also stated:

Whenever you find a war in this world, you could sense the UAE’s intervention in it either secretly or publicly, buying arms and aircraft as well as mercenaries to kill Muslims and destroy their countries.”

The UAE’s close ties to Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Israel are seen as a worrying sign by many that politics, war, and back-alley deals are more important than upholding international (and Islamic) standards for ensuring, protecting, and promoting human rights. Despite the fact that the UAE considers and calls itself an Islamic state, this facade has begun to crumble as its horrendous human rights abuses both within and outside the country are slowly being exposed. This boycott by the 87 Muslim scholars is hopefully one step towards setting the standard for Muslims around the world to stand against those who oppress, no matter who they may be.

TMV Team

The Muslim Vibe's shared team account! TMV is a grassroots media platform with an aim to inspire, inform and empower Western Muslims; through powerful and engaging Islamic content.

Riyadh deal: A Yemeni version of Balfour Declaration

By Mohammad Ghaderi

Officials in Riyadh are so satisfied with an agreement between the Saudi-backed forces loyal to the toppled Mansour al-Hadi government and the Southern Transitional Council (STC) supported the UAE that enthusiasm is obvious in their remarks.

Actually, it is an agreement between UAE and Saudi mercenary forces. It is so favorable for Riyadh that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman hailed the deal as a new chapter in Yemen’s history and a step toward ending the war in the country.  

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir said that the deal indicates that Saudi Arabia is trying to establish peace in Yemen. United States President Donald Trump also welcomed the deal and described it as “a very good start” for Yemen.

There are a few points to be made about the deal: first, many social media users and experts believe that the deal is in fact a Yemeni version of the Balfour Declaration which led to the creation of Israel in Palestine. Riyadh intends to occupy Yemen through the deal.

Second, the deal was basically brokered between the Saudi and UAE forces while the Yemeni representatives and Houthis were not involved, so it cannot be an agreement between south and north Yemen. The Houthi movement responded to the deal, saying that it is a useless agreement that cannot be implemented and has nothing to do with the Yemeni nation.

Third, the deal seeks to share power between Saudi and UAE forces in the country’s southern provinces. Therefore, Saudi Arabia and the UAE will indirectly exercise power in these areas.

The deal was boasted so important that bin Salman and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan were present during its signing process in Riyadh. The deal calls for the formation of a new cabinet of no more than 24 ministers within 30 days that would have equal representation for northerners and southerners. The Saudi-led coalition has practically taken the control of Yemen by this deal.

Fourth, by launching a media propaganda campaign, the Saudi officials are trying to improve their reputation through this deal. By exaggerating the deal, the officials attempt to describe it as their historic achievement to end the Yemeni war. But, the point is that the Saudi-led coalition and the UAE are the main culprits for the war in Yemen.  

Earlier, there have been intense clashes between mercenaries affiliated with the UAE and Saudi Arabia in Aden and southern Yemeni cities, with many experts calling it a sign of domestic disputes between these two countries. Saudi Arabia, which found out these clashes would hurt the aggressors, made great efforts in recent weeks to broker a ceasefire agreement between the mercenaries on both sides.

UAE forces have ceded the control of important areas of Aden to Saudi-backed mercenaries in recent weeks. Now, based on the deal, Saudi Arabia will take the control of Hadramout, which reveals Riyadh’s effort to occupy Yemen.

Fifth, the deal emphasized the necessity of unity among all parties under the watch of Saudi-led coalition to confront the Houthi movement. This move goes against national goals in Yemen. Riyadh had found that Yemen’s Houthis intended to launch a military operation against the aggressors, so it united mercenaries of the two countries in fight against the Houthi movement.

In fact, Saudi Arabia does not want clashes between Saudi and UAE mercenaries provide any opportunity for Houthis, therefor it resorts to any ploy to counter the Houthis.

If Riyadh really sought to strike an accord between the Yemenis, first it should have not mentioned the Saudi-led coalition in the deal; secondly, it should have engaged Houthi forces, which are an important part of Yemen’s political system and cannot be overlooked in the country’s political structure.

The Riyadh deal is actually an agreement between Saudi Arabia and the UAE to share power in southern Yemen, not an agreement between Yemeni forces to manage the country.

If the Yemenis want to put an end to the crisis created by Saudi-led coalition, they must reach a comprehensive agreement, with the participation of all groups, away from foreign interventions. The Yemenis should establish an integrated government and take different parts of the country back from the invaders.   

Riyadh delays the inevitable; the Houthis have the power in Yemen, Hadi has no authority

Omar Ahmed

Yemeni Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Saeed al-Khanbashi (R) and Southern Transitional Council (STC) representative Nasser al-Habci (L) are seen signing the 'Riyadh Agreement' in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on 5 November, 2019. [BANDAR ALGALOUD/SAUDI KINGDOM COUNCIL/HANDOUT/Anadolu Agency]

This week saw the signing of the much-delayed Riyadh Agreement between the Saudi-backed Yemeni government of exiled President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi and the UAE-supported Southern Transitional Council (STC). The Saudis hope that this power-sharing initiative will quell the dispute between the rival factions so that their coalition can focus on pushing back the Houthis in the north of Yemen to re-instate Hadi in the capital Sanaa. The problem with this is that it remains to be seen whether the agreement can be realised in full on the ground, because it merely delays the inevitable, which is the looming failure to defeat the Houthis. This is partly because they are arguably legitimate and, practically speaking, they have the real power, which is what politics is all about in the end.

Adding to the challenge of understanding the complex situation in Yemen, is the language often used to portray the Houthis as “rebels” in the north and the STC as “separatists” in the south; even MEMO is guilty of this. Thus we get a false image of the Saudi-backed Yemeni government in exile as being legitimate and authoritative, while the Houthis are a militia acting as “Iranian proxies”. The reality is much more nuanced.

Contrary to the simplistic portrayal of the Zaydi Houthi movement, who refer to themselves as AnsarAllah, they have been in an alliance with some 60 per cent of the Yemeni army loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh who was killed in 2017 by his erstwhile Houthis allies after seeking to defect to the Saudis. The 2014 Houthi takeover of Sanaa simply could not have happened without the support of the Yemeni army and Saleh’s intelligence networks, nor could it be maintained without the experience in government of Saleh’s General People’s Congress (GPC), as corrupt as it was.

It is worth reminding ourselves that Hadi was brought to “power” after Saleh was ousted, by winning an “election” where he was the only candidate. He was supposed to be there for a transitional period and to “relinquish his office after the vote”. If these are the standards of the international community for legitimacy and authority, then they are very low indeed.

Rasul Azam (Lofty Prophet) march took place in presence of politicians including Muhamad Ali al-Houthi and military commanders of Sanaa government and AnsarAllah

By 2015, the elite Yemen Republican Guard (YRG) had been co-opted into the Houthi chain of command as a formidable YRG-Houthi hybrid, consisting of “ideologically motivated foot soldiers on the one hand and trained operators of heavy weaponry and advanced equipment on the other hand.” They not only proved to be highly resilient to the ensuing Saudi-led military intervention in the country, but also intensified their bold cross-border raids into Saudi territory.

Descriptions of “the Houthis” may well be for the benefit of the ordinary reader; or it could be a deliberate attempt to mislead us about who actually has power and authority in Yemen. Little attention is paid by Western and Gulf news sources to the existence of a rival government to Hadi’s, namely the National Salvation Government, which came out of the GPC-Houthi alliance and enjoys partial power. Arguably, though, the real power lies in the “Revolutionary Committee”, with Mohammed Ali Al-Houthi at its helm; it’s an authoritative body founded solely by the Houthis. Hence, in “Houthi-aligned” media, a distinction is made between the joint forces of the Yemeni army and “popular committees” against the acts of aggression by the foreign coalition and puppet government. Suffice to say, despite ruling the most densely populated regions of Yemen and holding power in the rawest sense of the word, neither has been recognised by the UN.

Instead, we are expected by the mainstream media in the West to believe that the Riyadh-based Hadi leads the legitimate government of Yemen, even though it has no army of its own on the ground, relies heavily on the Saudi-armed Islamist Islah Party militia and Sudanese mercenaries, and has been ousted from not one, but two capital cities. Hadi has not only had a difficult time in trying to push back the Houthis with the help of foreign air support and a naval blockade, but also suffered setbacks from the clash of interests between Saudi Arabia and the UAE that had the potential to open another front in the already complex Yemeni conflict, splitting the country in two as it once was during the height of the Cold War until unification in 1990.

In the south, there are frequent skirmishes between the Islah militia aligned with Hadi and the Emirati-trained Security Belt and Elite Forces who are affiliated with the STC. This culminated with the southern secessionists taking over the port city of Aden, their envisioned future capital, as it once was for the state of South Yemen, and expelling the Hadi government from its interim seat of power in August.

Not too long before the steady withdrawal of UAE troops from the south, and the handover of Aden to Saudi forces during weeks of negotiations in Jeddah, the Hadi government announced that Ataq, the capital of the oil-producing Yemeni province of Shabwa, would serve as its next de facto national capital. Essentially, it became capital city number three. For an apparently “legitimate” and UN-recognised government, it becomes increasingly difficult to see what sort of authority or power Hadi’s administration actually has. Adding further doubts to its credibility, last week two ministers in Hadi’s team survived an assassination attempt in the city.

In an attempt to better understand the Riyadh Agreement, I met up with the UK spokesperson for the STC, Saleh Al-Noud, at his London office one day after it was signed. “This is not a solution to the Southern issue,” he insisted.

Al-Noud contended that the STC only accepted the agreement on the basis that it was for a transitional period only — “the Saudis are very keen to get everybody together to continue with the fight against the Houthis” — and then to revisit the other issues thereafter. He agreed with me about the alleged legitimacy of Hadi’s government, maintaining that it was always fragile and would cease to exist if the Saudis were not hosting and propping it up.

The Hadi government lacks power and a physical base in Yemen, and is not really popular among the people. Moreover, the leadership lacks charisma. The foremost social theorist of the twentieth century, Max Weber, said that power is the ability to exercise one’s will over others; for this reason, whether coercive or with consent, I am of the view that the National Salvation Government government has the real power in Yemen, and not the government held together by Riyadh.

It must be noted that although the STC has popular support in the south, it is not spread across all provinces. The Southern National Salvation Council, for example, has openly rejected the Riyadh Agreement, which “does not demand the departure of foreign troops and preserve our independence and sovereign decisions”, whilst a southern Yemeni journalist, Saleh Al-Hanashi reportedly criticised the agreement, suggesting that the STC will be the “biggest losers” from the deal. As far as Saleh Al-Noud is concerned, though, as long as the people in the south demand independence, the STC will stand for those aspirations as it was formed from the Hirak independence movement. However, should the agreement fall flat, there is no guarantee that Aden will fall back into STC hands, thus ending any chance for the puppet government in Riyadh to return; the capital Sanaa will remain firmly in the hands of the Houthi and Yemeni armed forces.

Perhaps as a prelude to almost certain defeat, the Saudis have recently acknowledged that they have opened up channels of communication with the Houthis. This makes it obvious that the Houthis have the power in Yemen, and Hadi has no authority. The future of the country may well be becoming a little clearer.

UAE releases $700m of Iranian funds

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif [left] seen with UAE's Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan [File photo]

The UAE has released $700 million in previously frozen funds to Iran, in a bid to improve relations between the two countries. A member of the parliament in Tehran hailed the move yesterday.

“The Emiratis have… understood that Western countries and Saudi Arabia cannot provide the [UAE] with security in the current circumstances,” Akbar Torki MP told Iranian media. “Financial relations with Iran have improved and some Iranian exchange offices in Dubai have resumed activity.”

The move is a surprise at a time when the Arab Gulf States generally perceive Iran to be a growing threat in the region, particularly due to its increasing military influence through the Shia militias it controls and funds in the Levant. Iran also supports the Shia Houthi militia in Yemen, which the UAE has until recently been fighting as a member of the Saudi-led coalition. The UAE has now more or less withdrawn from the latter and advocates a political solution.

The Arabian Gulf, particularly the strategic Strait of Hormuz, has been the subject of much tension over the past few months following Iran’s seizure of European ships and oil tankers in the summer and its shooting down of a US drone in the area. More recently, Iran is thought by many to have been behind the attack on a Saudi Aramco oil facility in in September, which hit global oil supplies by five per cent.

The unrest stems from America’s unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and Washington’s re-imposition of sanctions on the country, which has resulted in increasingly tense relations between the Islamic Republic and the US and EU. In response, the US has deployed a further 3,000 troops to Saudi Arabia to monitor the Iranian threat.

Historically, the UAE, like its neighbours Qatar and Bahrain, has had links and trade with Iran despite the hegemonic threat that it is seen to pose. This step to unfreeze Iran’s assets within the UAE, therefore, suggests that the government in Abu Dhabi is looking to improve relations with the Islamic Republic and reduce tension in the Gulf, not least to avoid the possibility of direct military conflict.

Russia Rises as Honest Broker in Mideast

President Putin’s successful Mideast tour this week evinces Russia as a credible, respected and perhaps pivotal mediator for peace in the region. This ascendancy of Russia comes as the United States flounders from its bankrupt hegemonic policies.

For most of the decades since the Second World War, it was the US that dominated the oil-rich region. And it is no coincidence during much of that period the so-called Pax Americana was anything but peaceful. That’s because Washington’s foreign policy is essentially driven by imperialist objectives of control and domination, which requires a zero-sum modus operandi.

The US either has clients which it calls “allies” and “partners”; or it targets non-compliant nations for regime change. It therefore follows that under this American order-disorder, the Middle East has been a by-word for conflict, sectarianism and endless wars. Washington is the fountainhead of strife and destruction because of its pursuit of unilateral objectives to satisfy empire. The self-adulation and projection of “noble leader of free world, democracy and rule of law” is but a delusional inversion of reality by the US and its Western cronies, including the dutiful corporate media which function as a propaganda system.

By contrast, Russia’s geopolitics are driven by multilateralism and adherence to international law. Moscow has repeatedly proclaimed the principles of respecting national sovereignty, as enshrined in the United Nations Charter established in 1945. Russia’s foreign policy is not imperialist, it is mutualist. This can be seen in the way Russia, along with China and others, have galvanized numerous countries to cooperate for economic partnership and development. The corollary is that Moscow’s military doctrine is primarily based on defense. For the US and its imperialist relation to the world, its militarism is all about offense and aggression because its power relies on domination and subjugation of others to furnish its interests.

Sooner of later, however, even supposed allies of the US end up becoming distrustful of, and estranged from, Washington. The self-serving nature of American power necessarily involves duplicity and treachery. A case in point is the way the Trump administration has unceremoniously abandoned erstwhile Kurdish “allies” in Syria; or the way Washington browbeats supposed allies like Turkey when they step out of line.

Washington’s fecklessness seems to have become more apparent under the Trump administration. But that is not due to Trump per se. It is a manifestation of American hegemonic power on the wane. Such a policy is unsustainable and anathema to the needs of the Middle East and the rest of the world for cooperation, multilateralism, respect for sovereignty and diplomacy.

Russia’s world stature has grown in concert with the increasing relevance of the geopolitical vision it espouses and practices.

When President Vladimir Putin was greeted this week in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, it was patently evident the high respect afforded to the Russian leader. That is in spite of the fact that Russia has staunchly supported the Syrian government to defeat a regime-change war, whose anti-government forces were backed by the Saudis and Emiratis. Their financial losses from sponsoring that disastrous war are no doubt colossal. But there was not a hint of chagrin this week from the Arab rulers towards Putin. Indeed, quite the opposite.

Russia has also stood firm in supporting Iran and its sovereign rights. The decades-long antagonism between Iran and the Saudis and other Persian Gulf Arab kingdoms is largely a result of the American policy of divide-and-rule. Despite Moscow’s support for Tehran, this was again clearly not a cause of animus from the Saudi and Emirati rulers.

In defending Syria – a longtime ally of Russia – Moscow has also warned Israel against further aggression. The installation of S-300 air defense systems in Syria is proof of Russia’s firmness. Yet Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu still maintains close personal relations with Putin. As with the Arab rulers, Israel may have opposing views to Russia’s, but at least they know where Moscow stands on geopolitical matters. That in turn makes for mutual respect and a willingness to negotiate.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is another example of a leader whose foreign policy objectives clashed with those of Russia over the war in Syria. Ankara backed the illegal regime-change campaign fomented by Washington and its NATO clients. Turkey, like the Sunni Arab regimes, lost its gamble. And it was Russia that caused that bitter loss when Putin ordered the military intervention from the end of 2015 to defend Moscow’s Syrian ally. The consistent principle is one of respect for sovereignty and international law. Eventually, all nations need to abide by that political principle, or else chaos, duplicity, treachery, and war prevail. Instead of America’s win-lose doctrine, Russia strives for win-win.

That is why Russia has been empowered to pull off a “diplomatic masterpiece” in Syria, as SCF writer Federico Pieraccini eloquently put it this week. The Syrian war is ending with Syria’s territorial integrity being restored thanks to Russia’s defensive military power and its diplomatic dexterity. Russia’s role as power broker in the Middle East is effective because it is respected by all – even by, at times, adversaries – due to its honest, consistent adherence to the principles of international law.