Fire Hydrant of Freedom
Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities => Politics & Religion => Topic started by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2010, 07:22:43 AM
-
We kick of this thread with a POTH piece by an FBI agent.
Scenes From the War on Terrorism in Yemen
By ALI H. SOUFAN
Published: January 2, 2010
The evidence that Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen had a role in the failed Christmas Day bombing of an American passenger jet has led some to declare that Yemen is the new front in the war against the terrorist organization. But the truth is, Yemen has been a front in that war since at least Oct. 12, 2000, when Al Qaeda blew up the Navy destroyer Cole, killing 17 American sailors, in the port of Aden. The explosives for the bombing were bought in Yemen. And the attackers and their accomplices were predominantly Yemenis. Indeed, after the attack, terrorists in Qaeda camps in Afghanistan would march and chant, “We, the Yemenis, destroyed the Cole.”
As the F.B.I. case agent for the Cole investigation from 2000 to 2005, I spent years with colleagues in Yemen hunting down those responsible, and we unraveled an entire Qaeda network in the country.
Even before the Cole attack, Yemen was linked to terrorist acts. Most of the people who executed the 1998 East African embassy bombings either traveled through Yemen or used fraudulent Yemeni passports. Almost two years after the Cole, Qaeda terrorists based in Yemen struck the Limburg, a French oil tanker, off the coast of Yemen. Qaeda terrorists in Yemen also helped facilitate the attacks of 9/11. Fahd al-Quso, a Yemeni Qaeda member who confessed to me his role in the U.S.S. Cole bombing, also admitted to ferrying money to a Qaeda operative known as Khallad who was part of an important 9/11 planning meeting in Malaysia.
As recently as this past August, an assassination attempt against Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, Saudi Arabia’s deputy minister of interior in charge of security, was plotted in Yemen. The explosive mixture that the suicide bomber used in that attack was the same one that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to ignite on the passenger jet over Detroit — and in each case the terrorist hid the mixture in his underwear.
Yemen is a very appealing base for Al Qaeda for various reasons. From its position at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, the country has convenient access to Al Qaeda’s main theaters of battle, including Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. Its borders are unsecured, and tribal groups sympathetic to Al Qaeda control many regions, so terrorists can move freely into, out of and around the country. And guns and explosives are readily available from Yemen’s thriving arms market.
The country’s tribal nature also makes it a relatively easy place for Al Qaeda to operate. Yemen has a weak government and powerful regional tribes, which in many ways operate as mini-governments free of central control. In addition, the government is struggling to contain both a secessionist movement in the south and a rebellion in the north. Rampant poverty and illiteracy make it easy for Al Qaeda to buy local support and manipulate Yemenis into believing its propaganda.
When I was in Yemen, I found many extremely capable officials in law enforcement and intelligence who were dedicated to stopping Al Qaeda. With their help, and with support from American intelligence and military agencies, our F.B.I. team was able to arrest and prosecute in a Yemeni court people responsible for the Cole bombing and for planning other attacks. By the time we left Yemen, in 2005, those terrorists were in prison.
Later, however, some of them “escaped,” and others were given clemency. Jamal al-Badawi, for example, a Qaeda terrorist who confessed to me his role in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, was sentenced to death by a Yemeni judge in 2004. But in 2006, he “escaped” from jail, only to turn himself in the next year — in a deal that released him from prison on a promise of good behavior. Today, Mr. Quso, the confessed Cole bomber, is not only free, he’s giving interviews and re-establishing himself as a terrorist operative.
During the past year, in an ominous sign of Yemen’s rising importance to Al Qaeda, the Saudi branch of the organization merged with the Yemeni branch to form a single terrorist group for the entire peninsula. Known as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, it is based in Yemen and headed by a Yemeni, Naser Abdel-Karim al-Wahishi, who served as a close aide to Osama bin Laden. Mr. Wahishi “escaped” from jail with Mr. Badawi.
Some Yemeni government officials highly value their relationship with the United States, which provides financial aid and military training. During our investigation of the Cole bombing, when the American government made it clear to the Yemenis that they expected full cooperation, the Yemenis who were dedicated to justice were given free rein and those with extremist ties were sidelined. After the trials were over and the terrorists made it out of jail, Robert S. Mueller III, the director of the F.B.I., flew to Yemen to complain, but there was little further protest by the United States. We dropped the ball.
A year and a half ago, when I briefed a bipartisan group of Senate staff members on Yemen, I warned that unless the American government sent a united message to the Yemenis to act against Al Qaeda, the terrorists responsible for the Cole would remain free and there would be future attacks against the United States connected to Yemen. Today, the terrorists behind the Cole are still free, and an attack connected to Yemen has been attempted.
It is possible to defeat Al Qaeda in Yemen without sending American troops. Now that the Yemenis are once again acting against Al Qaeda by striking the terrorist group’s bases and killing or apprehending many of its members, the United States must show that it has learned to stay focused and hold Yemeni officials accountable. This time, the terrorists must be permanently locked up, not allowed to escape or receive pardons. The most important sign of Yemen’s sincerity will be when those with the blood of 17 American sailors on their hands are all brought to justice in the way they deserve.
Ali H. Soufan was an F.B.I. special agent from 1997 to 2005.
-
Pay attention to the part about two that were released from Gitmo
SAN'A, Yemen – The U.S. and Britain closed their embassies in Yemen on Sunday in the face of al-Qaida threats, after both countries announced an increase in aid to the government to fight the terror group linked to the failed attempt to bomb a U.S. airliner on Christmas.
The confrontation with al-Qaida's offshoot in Yemen has gained new urgency since the 23-year-old Nigerian accused in the attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, told American investigators he received training and instructions from the group's operatives in Yemen. President Barack Obama said Saturday that the al-Qaida offshoot was behind the attempt.
White House counterterrorism chief John Brennan said the American Embassy, which was attacked twice in 2008, was shut Sunday because of "indications al-Qaida is planning to carry out an attack against a target inside of San'a, possibly our embassy."
"We're not going to take any chances" with the lives of embassy personnel, Brennan said. A statement on the embassy's Web site announcing the closure did not say how long it would remain closed.
In London, Britain's Foreign Office said its embassy was closed for security reasons. It said officials would decide later whether to reopen it on Monday.
The closure comes as Washington is dramatically stepping up aid to Yemen to fight al-Qaida, which has built up strongholds in remote parts of the impoverished, mountainous nation where government control outside the capital is weak.
Over the weekend, Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. general who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, announced that Washington this year will more than double the $67 million in counterterrorism aid that it provided Yemen in 2009. On Saturday, Petraeus met with Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh to discuss coordination in the fight against al-Qaida.
Britain announced Sunday that Washington and London will fund a counterterrorism police unit in Yemen. Britain will also host a high-level international conference Jan. 28 to come up with an international strategy to counter radicalization in Yemen.
The U.S. also provided intelligence and other help to back two Yemeni air and ground assaults on al-Qaida hide-outs last month, reported to have killed more than 60 people. Yemeni authorities said more than 30 suspected militants were among the dead.
The U.S. has increasingly provided intelligence, surveillance and training to Yemeni forces during the past year, and has provided some firepower, a senior U.S. defense official has said. Some of that assistance may be through the expanded use of unmanned drones, and the U.S. is providing funding to Yemen for helicopters and other equipment. Officials, however, say there are no U.S. ground forces or fighter aircraft in Yemen.
On Thursday, the embassy sent a notice to Americans in Yemen urging them to be vigilant about security.
Yemeni security officials said over the weekend that the country had deployed several hundred extra troops to Marib and Jouf, two mountainous eastern provinces that are al-Qaida's main strongholds in the country and where Abdulmutallab may have visited. U.S. and Yemeni investigators have been trying to track Abdulmutallab's steps in Yemen, which he visited from August until Dec. 7. He was there ostensibly to study Arabic in San'a, but he disappeared for much of that time.
Yemeni media also reported that the coast guard was increasing patrols to stop any incoming militants after an al-Qaida-linked insurgent group in Somalia, al-Shabab, claimed last week that it would send its fighters to help the terror group's offshoot there.
Al-Qaida fighters have dramatically increased their presence in Yemen over the past year, taking advantage of the San'a government's weak control over much of the country. Tribes hold sway over large areas, and many of them are discontented with the central government and have given refuge to al-Qaida fighters, both Yemenis and other Arabs coming from Saudi Arabia or war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yemen, the ancestral homeland of Osama bin Laden, was the scene of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, and in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, the Yemeni government worked with Washington to crack down on al-Qaida figures on its soil.
But the terror group has rallied, announcing in January 2009 the creation of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, grouping fighters from Yemen and neighboring Saudi Arabia. The leader of the group, Naser Abdel Karim al-Wahishi, is a Yemeni who was once close to bin Laden, and two Saudis who were released from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 and 2006 have taken up senior roles — Said al-Shihri, the group's deputy leader, and Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaish, seen as its theological adviser.
The Yemeni government, meanwhile, has been tied down battling two separate internal rebellions in the north and south. The various conflicts and the country's poverty and lack of resources have raised fears that instability could deepen.
Located at the tip of the Arabian peninsula, Yemen straddles a strategic maritime crossroads at the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, the access point to the Suez Canal. Across the Gulf is Somalia, an even more tumultuous nation where the U.S. has said al-Qaida militants have been increasing their activity. Yemen also borders Saudi Arabia, the world's leading oil producer.
There have been a spate of assaults on the U.S. Embassy in Yemen.
In an attack in September 2008, gunmen and two vehicles packed with explosives attacked the U.S. Embassy, killing 19 people, including an 18-year-old American woman and six militants. None of those killed or wounded were U.S. diplomats or embassy employees. Al-Qaida in Yemen claimed responsibility.
In March 2008, three mortars missed the U.S. Embassy and crashed into a high school for girls nearby, killing a security guard. In March 2003, two people were shot dead and dozens more were wounded as police clashed with demonstrators trying to storm the embassy.
Last January, gunmen in a car exchanged fire with police at a checkpoint near the embassy, hours after the embassy received threats of a possible attack by al-Qaida. Nobody was injured. In April, embassy personnel were put on a one-week lockdown, barred from leaving their homes or the embassy after al-Qaida suicide bombings that targeted South Korean visitors.
As recently as July, security was upgraded in San'a after intelligence reports warned of attacks planned against the U.S. Embassy.
-
Some very grim thoughts in here , , ,
=========================
Yemen's Complex Jihadist Problem
U.S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, in a Jan. 5 televised statement, warned that the United States would target al Qaeda in Yemen. Obama said, “As these violent extremists pursue new havens, we intend to target al Qaeda wherever they take root, forging new partnerships to deny them sanctuary, as we are doing currently with the government in Yemen.” The president’s remarks came after a meeting with top intelligence and national security officials to discuss security reviews following the failed Christmas Day attack on a Detroit-bound U.S. airliner claimed by the global jihadist network’s Yemen-based node.
The Dec. 25 attempt to destroy an American commercial aircraft nearly succeeded. If it had, it would have been the deadliest attack in the United States since 9/11. The incident places considerable political pressure on the Obama administration to take action against those behind the plot to destroy the Delta flight. In other words, it is politically necessary for Obama to order U.S. military action in Yemen to reassure Americans that something is being done to counter this latest jihadist threat.
There are serious limits, however, to how far Washington can go in terms of operationalizing the need to take action. For starters, U.S. intelligence and military have for several years been engaged in limited operations in the country in conjunction with their Yemeni counterparts. Obviously the existing counterterrorism/counterinsurgency cooperation was not sufficient enough to degrade the group.
“Any large-scale military offensive could prove to be the last straw to break the Yemeni camel’s back.”
But limited operations may not satisfy the administration’s critics at home, putting Obama in the uncomfortable position of having to get more aggressive in Yemen. The geopolitical reality of Yemen, however, makes any such venture an extremely risky one. Sanaa is not just threatened by jihadists.
The city faces a sectarian insurgency in the north, which has rendered the Saudi-Yemeni border area a de facto battleground for a Saudi-Iranian proxy war. In the south, President Ali Abdallah Saleh’s government faces a strong resurgent secessionist movement. And while it deals with these two very different forces, which could lead to state implosion, Sanaa relies heavily on support from extremely conservative tribes and radical Islamist forces — especially those in the security establishment — for its survival.
Therefore, any form of overt large-scale military offensive may well prove to be the last straw to break the Yemeni camel’s back. The Yemeni state is having a hard time battling jihadists on its own. One can only imagine the problems it would face if it allowed U.S. military operations on its soil. This is, in fact, exactly what al Qaeda desires.
Not having the wherewithal to topple a sitting government, the signature jihadist approach has been to lure the United States into a military intervention in Muslim countries. From al Qaeda’s point of view, such U.S. military intervention could create conditions of anarchy leading to the implosion of the state in question, thereby creating opportunities for the jihadists. In this case, it is not just about Yemen. There is also the danger of spillover into Saudi Arabia and the other energy-producing Persian Gulf Arab states on the Arabian Peninsula.
Yemen is very closely located to another major jihadist arena, across the Red Sea in Somalia — a country with a much worse jihadist problem and with Islamist militant linkages with Yemen. But the regional spillover would not only manifest itself in the form of jihadists. The fight between the Yemeni state and the jihadists could provide an opportunity for the Iranian-supported al-Houthis in the north to further escalate their insurgency. In essence, the Saudis would be faced with both an intensified jihadist and Iranian threat.
The Obama administration is well aware of these repercussions and is thus unlikely to opt for any major military campaign in Yemen. Instead it is likely to try to tackle this in a surgical manner through the use of intelligence, special forces and unmanned aerial vehicle strikes. The strategy employed in Yemen will largely be used to satisfy a political necessity at home, because any serious increase in involvement could make matters on the ground in Yemen even worse. But the problem is that similar measures are currently in place and are already making matters worse, albeit in a very gradual manner.
-
IIRC I heard yesterday that we are going to be selling various military toys, including night vision capabilities, to the Yemeni government.
I'm wondering if this, particularly the NV gear, is a good idea , , ,
-
No opinion on the merits of this piece. I post it simply to begin the conversation on Yemen:
By FREDERICK W. KAGAN AND CHRISTOPHER HARNISCH
President Barack Obama has made it clear that he does not intend to send American ground forces into Yemen, and rightly so. But American policy toward Yemen, even after the Christmas terrorist attempt, remains focused on limited counterterrorist approaches that failed in Afghanistan in the 1990s and have created tension in Pakistan since 2001.
Yemen faces enormous challenges. Its 24 million people are divided into three antagonistic groups: a Zaydi Shiite minority now fighting against the central government (the Houthi rebellion); the inhabitants of the former Yemen Arab Republic (in the north); and the inhabitants of the former Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen (in the south), many of whom are engaged in a secessionist rebellion. Its government is corrupt, its security forces have limited capabilities, and a large swath of its population is addicted to a drug called qat.
The World Bank estimates that Yemen will stop earning a profit on its oil production by 2017 (oil now accounts for more than half of the country's export income). Only 46% of rural Yemenis have access to adequate water (40% of the country's water goes to growing qat), and some estimates suggest Yemen will run out of water for its people within a decade.
American policy in Yemen has focused heavily on fighting al Qaeda, but it has failed to address the conditions that make the country a terrorist safe haven. Targeted strikes in 2002 killed key al Qaeda leaders in Yemen, and the group went relatively quiet for several years. The U.S. military has been working to build up the Yemeni Coast Guard (to prevent attacks similar to the one on the USS Cole in 2000) and to improve the counterterrorist capabilities of the Yemeni military in general.
But the U.S. has resisted supporting President Ali Abdallah Salah's efforts to defeat the Houthi insurgency, generating understandable friction with our would-be partner. As we have found repeatedly in similar situations around the world (particularly in Pakistan), local governments will not focus on terrorist groups that primarily threaten the U.S. or their neighbors at the expense of security challenges that threaten them directly. A strategy that attempts to pressure or bribe them to go after our enemies is likely to fail.
Mr. Salah is an unpalatable partner, and we don't want to be drawn into Yemen's internal conflicts more than necessary. But he is the only partner we have in Yemen. If we want him to take our side in the fight against al Qaeda, we have to take his side in the fight against the Houthis.
The U.S. must also develop a coherent approach that will help Yemen's government improve itself, address its looming economic and social catastrophes, and improve the ability of its military, intelligence and police organs to establish security throughout the country. The U.S. now maintains an earnest but understaffed and under-resourced USAID mission in the American embassy in Sana, the country's capital. But because of security concerns, U.S. officials are largely restricted to Sana and therefore cannot directly oversee the limited programs they support, let alone help address systemic governance failures.
Yemen received $150 million in USAID funds in 2009—one-tenth the amount dispensed in Afghanistan; less than one-fifth the amount provided to Gaza and the West Bank; and roughly half of what Nigeria received. The Pentagon recently said it would like to double the roughly $70 million Yemen received in security assistance. But the total pool from which that money would come from in 2010 is only $350 million, according to Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, and there are other pressing demands for those funds.
The problems in Yemen will not be solved simply by throwing American money at them. But dollars are the soldiers of the smart power approach. Having a lot of them does not guarantee success, but having too few does guarantee failure.
Developing a coherent strategy focused on the right objectives is important, and hard to do. The country team in any normal American embassy (like the one in Sana) does not have the staff, resources or experience to do so. The limited American military presence in Yemen does not either. Despite years of talk about the need to develop this kind of capability in the State Department or elsewhere in Washington, it does not exist. It must be built now, and quickly.
The president could do that by instructing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to form a Joint Interagency Task Force on Yemen. Its mission would be to develop and implement a strategy to improve the effectiveness of the Yemeni government and security forces, re-establish civil order, and eliminate the al Qaeda safe haven. Its personnel should include the Yemen country team, headed by the ambassador, and experts from other relevant U.S. agencies as well as sufficient staff to develop and execute programs. An immediate priority must be to provide security to American officials in Yemen that will enable them to travel around, even though there will not be American forces on the ground to protect them.
This strategy will require helping Yemen defeat the Houthi insurgency and resolve the southern secessionist tensions without creating a full-blown insurgency in the south. It will also require a nuanced strategy to help the Yemeni government disentangle al Qaeda from the southern tribes that now support or tolerate it.
One of the key errors the Bush administration made in Afghanistan and Iraq was to focus excessively on solving immediate security problems without preparing for the aftermath. Too narrow a focus on improving counterterrorist strikes in Yemen without addressing the larger context of the terrorist threat growing in that country may well lead to similar results. If the Obama administration wants to avoid sending troops to Yemen, it must act boldly now.
Mr. Kagan is resident scholar and director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Harnisch is a researcher and the head of the Gulf of Aden Team at the Critical Threats Project.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/26/AR2010012604239_pf.html
-
Yemen: A Hezbollah Withdrawal?
Stratfor Today » February 10, 2010 | 1714 GMT
AFP/Getty Images
Yemeni soldiers in Saada province on Feb. 10According to several STRATFOR sources, Hezbollah, upon orders from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, allegedly has withdrawn the remainder of its 400-strong contingent from Yemen. According to one source, the remaining Hezbollah operatives currently are in Khartoum, Sudan, and are awaiting flights to Beirut. They are expected to return to Beirut in small groups on Sudanese airlines.
This information — particularly the claim that Hezbollah had 400 men in Yemen — has not been verified. It must be noted that Iran and Hezbollah have an interest in playing up their involvement in Yemen as a way to amplify Iran’s militant threat against the United States and its Arab allies. STRATFOR therefore is deeply skeptical about the claims that Hezbollah sent 400 fighters to Yemen, where allegedly 70 of its operatives were killed and 90 wounded in Saudi aerial bombardments. The sheer logistical challenge of moving 400 armed men behind enemy lines, supplying them and then dealing with a high number of casualties is highly daunting, especially with U.S. intelligence helping with surveillance in the area.
However, the report of Iran downsizing Hezbollah’s (however limited) presence in Yemen tracks with information STRATFOR has received in recent weeks. The report also follows a decision by Yemen’s al-Houthi leadership to negotiate a cease-fire with Saudi Arabia.
STRATFOR first reported in September 2008 that Hezbollah operatives had perished in fighting alongside al-Houthi rebels in Yemen’s northern mountainous region. The al-Houthi insurgency escalated from a domestic conflict in Yemen to a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the summer of 2008, when Iran began increasing financial and military support for the rebels as a way to emphasize its possession of another lever that could be used against U.S.-allied Arab Gulf states in the event of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Iran’s push to send Hezbollah operatives to Yemen reportedly caused a major split within Hezbollah’s senior ranks over whether the militant group should be expending assets on Iran’s proxy project in the Arabian Peninsula.
Iran had hoped to use its operations in Yemen as additional leverage in its nuclear negotiations, but Washington was careful to avoid being publicly drawn into the fray by acknowledging Iran’s role in the conflict. STRATFOR received indications in January that Iran, frustrated by its inability to exploit the al-Houthi rebellion in its dealings with the United States, had begun selectively supporting elements of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). STRATFOR does not believe such support has reached a significant level, but the AQAP threat is of far greater concern to the United States, particularly following the Christmas Day 2009 failed AQAP attack on a U.S. airliner. If Iran has indeed decided to withdraw its Hezbollah assets from Yemen, particular attention must be paid to Iran’s AQAP connection. Though these links are not yet critical, AQAP is unlikely to turn down support from Iran, even if the group considers Iran an ideological foe.
-
Just before dawn on Dec. 24, an American cruise missile soared high over the
southern coast of the Arabian peninsula, arced down toward the dark
mountains above the Rafadh Valley in Yemen's Shabwa province and found its
mark, crashing into a small stone house on a hillside where five young men
were sleeping. Half a mile away, a 27-year-old Yemeni tribesman named Ali
Muhammad Ahmed was awakened by the sound. Stumbling out of bed, he quickly
dressed, slung his AK-47 over his shoulder and climbed down a footpath to
the valley that shelters his village, two hours from the nearest paved road.
He already sensed what had happened. A week earlier, an American airstrike
killed dozens of people in a neighboring province as part of an expanded
campaign against Al Qaeda militants. (Although the U.S. military has
acknowledged playing a role in the airstrikes, it has never publicly
confirmed that it fired the missiles.)
Ahmed soon came upon the shattered house. Mangled bodies were strewn among
the stones; he recognized a fellow tribesman. Scattered near the wreckage
were bits of yellow debris with the words "US Navy" and long serial numbers
written on them. A group of six or seven young men were standing in the dawn
half-light, looking dazed. All were members of Al Qaeda. Among them was Fahd
al-Quso, a longtime militant who is wanted by the F.B.I. for his suspected
role in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in 2000. The missile had struck in
one of the most remote and inaccessible valleys on earth, in a place where
Al Qaeda has been trying to establish a foothold. Quso was the local cell
leader and had been recruiting young men for years. Ahmed knew him well.
I met Ahmed several weeks later in Sana, the Yemeni capital, where he works
part time as a bodyguard. By that time, Al Qaeda's Yemeni branch had claimed
credit for a failed effort to detonate a bomb in a Detroit-bound jetliner on
Christmas Day, igniting a global debate about whether Yemen was the next
front in the war on terror. Yemen's once-obscure vital statistics were
flashing across TV screens everywhere: it is the Arab world's poorest
country, with a fast-growing and deeply conservative Muslim population of 23
million. It is running out of oil and may soon be the first country in the
world to run out of water. The central government is weak and corrupt,
hemmed in by rebellions and powerful tribes. Many fear that Al Qaeda is
gaining a sanctuary in the remote provinces east of Sana, similar to the one
it already has in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On the day I met him, Ahmed - a small, rail-thin man with a bony face -
seemed still awed and a bit frightened by what happened in his valley. He
was dressed in a tattered blazer and a futa, the patterned cloth skirt
Yemeni men often wear. He sat on a sofa leaning forward with his hands on
his thighs, glancing occasionally at me. We were in a small, sparely
furnished office belonging to Ahmed's employer and friend Abdulaziz
al-Jifri, who had given him permission to speak. It was evening, and in the
room next door men could be heard laughing and chatting as they drank tea
and chewed khat, the narcotic leaf Yemenis use to relax.
"We took the bodies under the trees," Ahmed continued in a quiet voice. "One
was from my tribe. He had just joined Al Qaeda, and that was his first night
sleeping with them." He paused, and I caught a hint of defensiveness,
perhaps also of anger, in his eyes. He seemed reluctant to stray from his
narrative, but it was clear that he felt the bombing was an injustice. "We
knew they were Qaeda, but they were young, and they hadn't done anything,
and they were locals," he said. "They came and went at checkpoints, and the
government didn't seem to care. So we dealt with them normally.. . .
"Later I took the bodies to the graveyard," he went on to say. "Then I
talked with Fahd's cousin about what we should do about him."
Within an hour, Ahmed said, the discussions expanded, and Ali al-Asowad, the
aging sheik of the Abdullah tribe, was summoned from his house. The sun was
rising over the arid brown hills around Rafadh and soon almost 100 people
were sitting under the spreading boughs of an acacia tree for an emergency
tribal meeting.
============
(Page 2 of 10)
Dozens of people spoke. Some were angry. Most people in the valley were
related to the dead men or knew them. The victims had scarcely stood out in
Rafadh, where everyone carried weapons and hatred of the Yemeni government
was nothing unusual. What did it matter that they hated America and called
themselves Qaeda? Some of the tribesmen also spoke in defense of Fahd
al-Quso, who moved to the area in 2007. His grandfather had a house there,
so he had a right to the tribe's protection. But others stood up and shouted
angrily that Quso had put the whole tribe in needless danger by basing
himself in their village; more American bombs might be coming soon.
The people of Rafadh had decisions to make, ones that might soon ramify
across all of Yemen's remote mountains and deserts and even half a world
away in the Pentagon. What did Al Qaeda mean to them? Was it worth
protecting? A bargaining chip to be used against a neglectful government? Or
just an invitation to needless violence?
SANA RESEMBLES A FORTRESS, not just in its architecture but in its
geography. It is set on a high plateau, surrounded by arid, craggy
mountains. At its heart is the Old City, a thicket of unearthly medieval
towers and banded spires that stands out sharply in the dry desert air. This
was the entire city until a few decades ago, its high walls locked every
evening at dusk. Today Sana is a far more sprawling place, with Internet
cafes and swarms of beat-up taxis and a sprinkling of adventure tourists.
The Old City gates are mostly gone now, and although men still carry the
traditional daggers known as jambiyas in their belts, they also wear
blazers, often with cheap designer logos on their sleeves. Like other Arab
capitals, it is full of policemen, and there are occasional checkpoints
manned by bored-looking soldiers in camouflage uniforms.
But Yemen is different. Beneath the familiar Arab iconography, like pictures
of the president that hang in every shop, there is a wildness about the
place, a feeling that things might come apart at any moment. A narcotic haze
descends on Yemen every afternoon, as men stuff their mouths with glossy
khat leaves until their cheeks bulge and their eyes glaze over. Police
officers sit down and ignore their posts, a green dribble running down their
chins. Taxi drivers get lost and drive in circles, babbling into their
cellphones. But if not for the opiate of khat, some say, all of Yemen - not
just those areas of the south and north already smoldering with discontent -
would explode into rebellion.
One morning in Sana, I discovered a crowd of people protesting in the stone
courtyard outside the cabinet building. Many had shackle scars on their
wrists and ankles. They came from an area called Jaashin, about 100 miles
south of the capital. But some of them, I found, did not even know that
Jaashin was in the Republic of Yemen. Their only real ruler was the local
sheik, Muhammad Ahmed Mansour, who is, it turns out, a kind of latter-day
Marquis de Sade. Mansour is also a poet, who earns extra license for his
cruelties by writing florid odes to Yemen's president. Some pilgrims from
Jaashin said they were imprisoned, shackled and beaten by the sheik - who
maintains his own army and several prisons - after refusing to relinquish
their property to him. I asked Ahmed Abdu Abdullah al-Haithami, a bent old
farmer in a tattered green jacket, what country he was living in. He looked
up at me with imploring eyes. "All I know is that God rules above, and the
sheik rules here below," he said. All of this, I later learned, was
documented by Yemeni lawyers, who have been working on behalf of the people
of Jaashin for years to little effect. As one lawyer, Khaled al-Alansi, put
it to me, "If you can't fight sheik Mansour, how can you possibly fight Al
Qaeda?"
Two thousand years ago, the area east of Sana held one of the earth's most
prosperous kingdoms, a lush agricultural region of spices and fruits, fed by
irrigation canals from a vast man-made dam. The Romans called Yemen "Arabia
Felix," or Happy Arabia. Today, the eastern region is an arid wasteland.
Most people scrape by on less than $2 a day, even though they live atop
Yemen's oil and gas fields. There are few ways to make a living other than
smuggling, goat-herding and kidnapping. The region is also, chronically, a
war zone. Tribal feuds have always been part of life here, but in recent
years they have grown so common and so deadly that as much as a quarter of
the population cannot go to school or work for fear of being killed. The
feuds often devolve into battles with bands of raiders mowing down their
rivals with machine-gun fire or launching mortars into a neighboring
village. No one knows how many people die in these wars, but Khaled Fattah,
a sociologist who has studied Yemen's tribes for years, told me that
hundreds of victims a year is a conservative estimate.
============
Page 3 of 10)
Every time I drive out of Sana I get an ominous sense of going backward in
time to a more lawless era. As the city's towers fade in the distance, the
houses drop away into level desert and occasional piles of construction
rubble. The traffic thins out and consists mostly of pickup trucks carrying
tribesmen with patterned cloth kaffiyehs tied around their heads. You pass
the first of several checkpoints, where skinny soldiers in ill-fitting
uniforms warily circle the car, looking for weapons or kidnapping victims.
You pass towering, desolate mountains of black and brown igneous rock. Once
you're out of Sana province, there are virtually no signs of the Yemeni
state. Every able-bodied man seems to carry an AK-47 rifle over his
shoulder; it's not uncommon to see rocket-propelled-grenade launchers. Only
the oil and gas fields, hidden behind wire fences and vigilantly watched
over by the Yemeni military, seem to merit the government's attention.
Last year I expected to see at least a few government soldiers when I
visited the ancient city of Shibam in Hadramawt, the vast eastern province
where Osama bin Laden's father was born. A few months earlier, four South
Korean tourists were blown up by a suicide bomber as they admired the view
of Shibam from across the valley. I was a little nervous. "Don't worry," my
guide said, patting my shoulder as we walked up to the ridge where the
Koreans died. "Ever since the bombing they have put this place on high
security." But when we got to the top of the ridge there was not a single
soldier or policeman to be seen. We gazed out over the valley in silence. A
sign stood nearby, showing a pair of binoculars and the words in English
"Discover Islam." As we began to leave, my guide smiled broadly and gestured
at the sign. "The Koreans - they discovered Islam," he said, giggling at his
joke.
Even in the capital, law and order often mean less than they do in other
Arab countries. One afternoon I was having tea with Abdulaziz al-Jifri when
a shot rang out nearby. I thought nothing of it; it might have been a
firecracker or someone testing a gun. We were in the safest area of the
city, a neighborhood called Hadda, where rich Yemenis and foreign diplomats
have built an enclave in recent decades. But Jifri got up from the cushion
where he was sitting to go see what happened. He came back 15 minutes later
with a look of surprise on his face. A friend of the family, a wealthy
tribal figure, had been shot dead a block away. The victim, Jifri explained,
was walking up to the gate of his home when someone apparently shot him once
in the head. There were no witnesses and no one even bothered to call the
police, who are so corrupt and incompetent that most people view them as
useless.
"There is no law in Yemen," Jifri said, shaking his head. We went on
drinking tea and talking politics.
By then, I had spent at least a dozen afternoons at Jifri's house. He was a
unique figure: educated in Britain and Saudi Arabia, he was designated by
his father - a wealthy businessman with political connections - as a liaison
to the tribes in Shabwa and Marib, two of the main areas where Al Qaeda is
said to find sanctuary. He is tall and handsome, with large, mischievous
brown eyes and a knack for setting a room on fire with laughter. His family
are sayyids, or descendants of the prophet Muhammad, and that gave them a
special status in the caste like social hierarchy that prevailed until
Yemen's republican revolution in 1962. Even now, the Jifris are trusted and
respected like few other clans in rural Yemen.
Jifri became my link to rural Yemen. There was no way for me to travel to
Shabwa or Marib undetected, I was told. So day after day I would sit on a
cushion beside him in the family's rectangular living room as various sheiks
and relatives from those provinces arrived to sip tea, chew khat and talk
until dark about what was happening among the tribes. It was there that I
met Ali Muhammad Ahmed, along with others from the area around Rafadh, in
Shabwa province, the valley where the cruise missile struck on Dec. 24. The
Jifris themselves have a house in the Rafadh Valley.
-
Page 4 of 10)
Rafadh, several hundred miles southeast of the capital, is in some ways
typical of the areas where Al Qaeda found refuge in Yemen. It is set among
dry mountains populated by baboons, there are no paved roads and cars must
travel laboriously along dirt tracks that wind among the hills. There is no
public water supply or electricity and no functioning school. The valley was
largely peaceful during the 1970s and '80s, when the socialist government
that ruled South Yemen - a separate country until it united with the north
in 1990 - tried to eradicate tribalism. But since then Yemen's president,
Ali Abdullah Saleh, has encouraged tribal practices, and the feuds have
returned. Rafadh itself has been devastated by a tribal conflict that has
raged for years, killing at least a dozen people and wounding many more in
an area with only a few hundred inhabitants.
Ahmed played a central role in the feud. In 2006, Ahmed's father and older
brother were gunned down by men posing as customers at the father's market
stall. Afterward, he told me, he drove the bullet-riddled bodies to the
nearest police station to ask for justice. The police captain in charge
waved him off dismissively, he said, telling him, "You tribes are always
causing trouble - deal with it yourself."
He did. Ahmed gathered five cousins and together they hunted down and shot
two men they believe were among the killers and three other men who were
sheltering them. The feud briefly threatened to escalate into a broader war.
The government promised to mediate but failed to do so, and the feud grew
with further kidnappings and clumsy army suppression. Many local people felt
the government was largely to blame.
It was then that Fahd al-Quso, the Al Qaeda figure, arrived in the valley.
He had roots in the area but, perhaps more important, he was an outlaw to
the Yemeni authorities, and that alone earned him a welcome in Rafadh. The
United States wanted him in connection with the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole,
which killed 17 American sailors. The Yemeni police arrested his younger
brother, a tactic aimed at pressuring Quso to turn himself in.
"Fahd was a victim in the eyes of the tribes," Ahmed told me. "They accepted
what he said. People distrust the government here, so those who have
problems with it will get sympathy."
Last summer, as Al Qaeda's Arabian branch began setting off alarms in
Washington, Quso became more active, Ahmed told me. "We saw lots of Al Qaeda
guys coming and going from his house," Ahmed said. They tended to keep to
themselves, refusing to give rides to others from the village.
But the tribesmen of Rafadh continued to shelter Quso and his men and not
just because of their shared hatred of the government. Quso had offered to
supply teachers for the village school. Local families knew he was with Al
Qaeda but welcomed the news for a simple reason: there were no teachers in
the school at all. "The people were saying, 'We would rather have our kids
get an Al Qaeda education than be illiterate,' " Jifri told me. After
hearing about Quso's offer, Jifri went to officials in Sana and delivered a
blunt message: "Right now you have one Al Qaeda guy in Rafadh, tomorrow you
will have 700."
Initially, Jifri said, the government refused to provide teachers, saying
any town that was willing to accept help from Al Qaeda was beneath contempt.
Finally, they relented.
"The government agreed to send 6 teachers," Jifri told me. "Fahd brought
16."
WHEN PEOPLE TALK about the government in Yemen, they really mean one man:
Ali Abdullah Saleh. Despite the country's many political parties - Islamist,
Socialist, Arab nationalist - the country is run almost entirely by Saleh,
and he runs it exactly like a sheik: using his own tribe as a power base and
constantly making deals to head off his rivals. Saleh came to power in 1978;
pictures of him at the time show a skinny young man in a military cap that
looks too big for him, his eyes covered by aviator sunglasses.
At the time, most of Yemen was still just emerging from isolation. In 1962 a
group of military officers, inspired and aided by Gamal Abdel Nasser in
Egypt, overthrew the xenophobic religious dynasty that, from its northern
base, ruled much of Yemen for centuries. Some of the young officers hoped to
modernize Yemen and make it more like other Arab countries. In the mid-1970s
one Yemeni president, Ibrahim al-Hamdi, tried to tame the powerful tribal
sheiks, extend the state's power throughout the country and unify with South
Yemen, which emerged from British occupation in 1967. Yemeni intellectuals
still talk about Hamdi with nostalgia. But the sheiks and their Saudi
backers were not pleased. In October 1977, Hamdi was found riddled with
bullets in his Sana home. The killers had thrown the bodies of murdered
French prostitutes beside him to blacken his legacy.
==========
Page 5 of 10)
Saleh was not a man to make such mistakes. He fought in a tribal army as a
teenager and then made his way up through the ranks of the military,
impressing superiors with his ruthlessness and charm. He became a tank
commander - a crucial skill at a time when tanks were a new and essential
weapon. When Hamdi's successor, Ahmad al-Ghashmi, was blown up by a bomb
hidden in a briefcase, Saleh was a compromise replacement. No one expected
him to last long.
Three decades later, Saleh retains a stiff, military bearing, with a strong
jaw and glinting eyes. In person he conveys an impression of fierce pride
and gruffness and the natural defensiveness of a man from a small tribe who
fought his way up with no more than an elementary-school education. When I
interviewed him in 2008, he seemed impatient and almost angry. His eyes
darted around the room as he fired off commands to his aides in a guttural
voice. He bridled at questions about the American role in Yemen. "Arrogant,"
he said, staring at me, then adding disdainfully in English, "Cowboys."
SOME SAY SALEH has lasted so long because, unlike his predecessors, he knew
not to take on the tribes directly. "Saleh survived by mastering the tribal
game as no one else had," Khaled Fattah, the tribal expert, said. He did so
in two ways. First, he coddled the big tribal sheiks, bringing them into the
capital and building them large homes. He created a patronage network that
grew substantially after Yemen began pumping oil in the 1980s, paying large
sums to sheiks, military leaders, political figures and anyone who might
pose a threat to his power. Much of Yemen's budget now goes into corruption
and kickbacks - worth billions of dollars - that fuel this network,
according to diplomats, analysts and oil-industry figures in Sana.
Second, Saleh adopted what some Yemenis call "the policy of management
through conflicts." If a tribe was causing trouble, he would begin building
up its rivals as a counterweight. If a political party became threatening,
he would do the same thing, sometimes even creating a cloned version of the
same party with people on the government payroll. "The government plays
divide and rule with us," Arfaj bin Hadban, a tribal sheik from Jawf
province, north of Sana, said. "If one tribe will not do what he wants, he
gets the neighbors to pressure it. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's
weapons, sometimes it's employment for the tribesmen."
But in a sense, the key to Saleh's long rule - and to much of Yemen's modern
history - lies just to the north in Saudi Arabia. The kingdom squats atop
Yemen on the map like a domineering older brother with a rebellious sibling.
Starting in 1962, the Saudi royal family viewed Yemenis' democratic
aspirations with alarm and began paying hefty stipends to tribal sheiks
throughout the country to reinforce its influence. Later, the Saudis began
spreading their hard-line strand of Islam throughout the country, with help
from some like-minded Yemenis. Hundreds of religious schools sprang up
teaching Salafism, the puritanical sect that denounces all other sects as
heresy. (The Saudi variant is usually called Wahhabism.) This was bound to
be divisive in Yemen, where a third or more of the population were Zaydis,
an offshoot of Shiite Islam.
As the influence of the Salafists grew, Saleh formed close ties to jihadists
and radical clerics like Abdul Majid al-Zindani, who is listed by the U.S.
Treasury Department as a "specially designated global terrorist." Saleh had
a political motive: Salafists are mostly quiescent and preach obedience to
the ruler (even if they call for violent jihad in other lands). That was an
appealing trait in Yemen's complex social mosaic, where rivalries based on
class, region, religious sect and lineage are endemic. But Saleh also knew
that he needed the Saudis, who are widely believed to have arranged his
accession in the first place.
When I met him, Saleh seemed enraged that anyone should dare to criticize
his methods. "We have unified the country and brought stability," he told
me. That is true. Saleh orchestrated the unification of north and south
Yemen in 1990, and he has remained in power for 32 years. But even as he
spoke, in June 2008, those achievements seemed to be unraveling. Zaydi
rebels from the north - angered by Saleh's support for the Salafists - were
gaining ground. In the south, a groundswell of economic discontent was
rising and later became an open secessionist movement. The fact that Saleh
is now trying to arrange for his son Ahmed Saleh to succeed him as president
has alienated many tribal leaders and other allies, narrowing Saleh's power
base. In the past year, as Al Qaeda began to mount more frequent attacks, he
turned to some old friends for help, only to see them abandon him.
==========
Page 6 of 10)
One night in January 2009, Tareq al-Fadhli, a 42-year-old aristocrat from
south Yemen, received a phone call from Saleh. Fadhli wasn't surprised: the
Yemeni president is famously impulsive and has a habit of calling people
late at night with urgent ideas or demands that are sometimes forgotten by
daylight. But this one was unusual. Saleh wanted to convene all the old
jihadis who fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, Fadhli told me.
"He wanted us to make a dialogue with the new generation of Al Qaeda,"
Fadhli said. "He said he wanted to arrange to send them abroad to Saudi
Arabia and Somalia, and in return he would release the ones who were in
prison." The released prisoners would stay in Yemen.
It was a bold idea, to put it mildly. Saudi Arabia is Yemen's most important
ally and had waged bloody battles to rid itself of homegrown jihadi
fighters. But Al Qaeda, once a manageable problem, seemed to be running out
of control in Yemen, and America was putting on the pressure. Saleh was
desperate to find a way to rid himself of the militants, preferably without
calling in American airstrikes or doing anything else that would alienate
the radical clerics on whose political support he counted.
Fadhli, who has mournful eyes and a distinguished face, was a natural
intermediary and an old ally. As a young man, he fought for three years in
Afghanistan, leaving only after he was wounded at Jalalabad. He had formed a
close friendship with Osama bin Laden, whom he still remembers fondly.
Later, when the socialists of southern Yemen rebelled in 1994, Fadhli formed
a brigade of jihadists at the central government's request and helped put
down the rebels. His friend bin Laden helped out, providing millions of
dollars' worth of arms and hundreds of fighters who were hungry for another
chance to kill godless socialists.
After that, the former jihadis split. Fadhli, like many others, went back to
civilian life, becoming a landowner in the south and an adviser to Saleh. He
said goodbye to bin Laden in Sudan in 1994 and has not seen him since. But
some veterans continued to preach jihad and to train in Afghanistan with Al
Qaeda, which began to call for the overthrow of secular Arab regimes.
The first real sign that the jihadis were a source of trouble at home came
in 2000 with the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in the Yemeni port town of Aden
on the southern coast. Seventeen American sailors were killed. A year later,
after the Sept. 11 attacks, Saleh recognized that a major shift had taken
place. Fearing that the United States might invade Yemen, he flew to
Washington and pledged his support. At home, his security forces rounded up
hundreds of former jihadists and jailed them en masse without charge. In
November 2002, the C.I.A. used a Predator drone to kill Abu Ali al-Harithi,
then the leader of Al Qaeda in Yemen, as he was driving in the desert east
of Sana.
Saleh knew his collaboration with the United States could make the jihadis
turn on him. He was furious after American officials leaked word of their
role in the Harithi assassination. Later, Saleh repeatedly denied the
Americans permission to kill Al Qaeda leaders during Yemen's 2006
presidential election because he feared the strikes might harm his electoral
prospects, according to one high-ranking Yemeni official. Saleh had
struggled for years to find a compromise between the radicals and the
Americans. He created an Islamic "dialogue" program to bring jihadists under
the umbrella of the state, then abandoned it after several of its graduates
returned to terrorism. Popular sympathy for the jihadist cause was still
high, and in February 2006 Saleh suffered a deep embarrassment when 23
prisoners, many of them in Al Qaeda, escaped from a maximum-security prison
in Sana. The authorities offered a preposterous explanation: the men
tunneled out of their cell with spoons and table legs and emerged in the
bathroom of a neighboring mosque. The truth, the high-ranking official told
me, was that officers in the Political Security Organization arranged the
escape. "You have to remember, these officers used to escort people from
Sana to Pakistan during the Afghan jihad," he said. "People made
relationships, and that doesn't change so easily."
-
Page 7 of 10)
By 2007, it was clear that a new and more dangerous generation of Al Qaeda
militants was emerging. Unlike their predecessors, these men aimed openly to
overthrow the Yemeni state and refused all dialogue with it. Many later
claimed that they suffered torture in Yemeni prisons during long terms -
usually without formal charges. Some of them had gone to Iraq and returned
with valuable battlefield skills. The attacks grew bloodier and more
frequent: a suicide bombing in July 2007 killed eight Spanish tourists;
there were attacks on oil pipelines. In September 2008, suicide bombers in
two cars struck the U.S. Embassy in Sana in a meticulously planned operation
that left 10 Yemenis and all 6 attackers dead.
Saleh tried to win the militants over through intermediaries. Nasser
al-Bahri, a 35-year-old former driver for bin Laden, told me that he tried
reaching out to the new militants. They refused, and he soon discovered he
was on a "death list" of accused traitors. Several other former jihadists
told me the same thing. "I try to talk to these people," said Ali Muhammad
al-Kurdi, another militant Islamist who fought in Afghanistan. "They tell
me, 'You are an agent.' " Some of the older jihadists advised Saleh to
immunize the state from attacks by Islamizing it. He briefly deployed a
morality-police brigade, modeled on the notorious cane-wielding mutawa in
Saudi Arabia. The attacks continued.
Finally, in January of last year, Tareq al-Fadhli received his late-night
phone call from the president. Saleh said he would release 130 Al Qaeda
sympathizers right away as a good-will gesture and asked Fadhli to arrange
the rest.
Fadhli told me that he formed a committee of former jihadis and began
traveling through the areas where Al Qaeda has found sanctuary - Marib,
Shabwa, Jawf and Abyan provinces. "The tribal sheiks cooperated with us
everywhere," Fadhli told me. "Whenever we found Qaeda members, we told them:
'The government wants you to turn yourself in, but it's O.K. We will
guarantee your safety.' "
In the end, 20 people on the government's 60-most-wanted list agreed to stop
fighting, Fadhli said. But the mediators never made any progress with Nasser
al-Wuhayshi, the leader of Al Qaeda's Yemen-based branch, or his top
deputies.
A few months after the failed negotiation, in April 2009, Fadhli defected
from the government, joining the southern secessionist movement. He told me
that he was tired of hearing Saleh offer tempting deals to Al Qaeda while
refusing to even talk to the leaders in the south, whose movement - rooted
in claims of economic discrimination - is populist, secular and nonviolent.
Meanwhile, the United States grew increasingly concerned about Al Qaeda's
growth in Yemen and about Saleh's tendency to see it as a family problem,
solvable through dialogue. Veteran jihadists were said to be coming to Yemen
from Afghanistan and Somalia. Last summer, Gen. David H. Petraeus, then the
overall commander of American military forces in the Middle East, visited
Sana, and the number of American military trainers working with Yemen's
counterterrorism forces quietly grew. In the fall, a select group of
American officials met with Saleh and showed him irrefutable evidence that
Al Qaeda was aiming at him and his relatives, who dominate Yemen's military
and intelligence services. That seems to have abruptly changed Saleh's
attitude, American diplomats told me. The Yemenis began to mount more
aggressive ground raids on Al Qaeda targets, in coordination with the
airstrikes that began in December.
But the strikes and raids were a short-term tactic. The real problem was
that Yemen, with its mind-boggling corruption, its multiple insurgencies,
its disappearing oil and water and its deepening poverty, is sure to descend
further into chaos if something does not change. Everyone has acknowledged
this, including President Obama and a growing chorus of terrorism analysts.
So far, the calls for action have yielded nothing. I spoke to a number of
American officials in Washington and to a variety of diplomats at the
embassy in Sana. They all told me the same thing: no one has a real strategy
for Yemen, in part because there are so few people who have any real
expertise about the country. No American diplomats travel to the provinces
where Al Qaeda has found sanctuary. Even the Yemeni government has great
difficulty reaching these places; often they have no idea whether airstrikes
or bombing runs have hit their targets, because they dare not show up to
check until days afterward.
Officially, American policy in Yemen is twofold: using airstrikes and raids
to help the Yemeni military knock out Al Qaeda cells, while increasing
development and humanitarian aid to address the root causes of radicalism.
In late June, the White House announced it was more than tripling its
humanitarian assistance, to $42.5 million. But the numbers are still small
given Yemen's need. And diplomats concede that they have not figured out how
to address the central issues of poor governance, corruption and the
economy. "There is a huge amount of diplomacy that needs to be done and is
not being done," Edmund J. Hull, the U.S. ambassador to Yemen from 2001 to
2004, said when I met him in Washington. "It makes me uneasy to hear that
we're not getting out to those remote areas. One way or another, we have
ceded the initiative to Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is calling the shots."
============
Page 8 of 10)
AL QAEDA HAS a clear Yemen strategy. On Jan. 23, 2009, the group released a
high-quality video clip on the Internet showing four men sitting on a floor,
with a clean white curtain and a flag behind them. One of them was Nasser
al-Wuhayshi, the group's leader, wearing a white turban, and one was Qassim
al-Raymi, its military commander, clad in fatigues and a red-and-white
kaffiyeh. Sitting alongside them were two new Qaeda commanders, both former
detainees from the American prison camp at Guantánamo Bay.
The video was a setback for President Obama, who had been inaugurated days
earlier and had made a high-profile pledge to close Guantánamo - where
nearly half the remaining inmates were Yemenis - within a year. But the real
news was Al Qaeda's announcement that same month that it was merging its
Saudi and Yemeni branches into a single unit: Al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula. The new group incorporated a number of fighters from Saudi
Arabia, where the government had cracked down fiercely on terrorist
networks. It proclaimed a broad ambition: to serve as a base for attacks
throughout the region and to replace the infidel governments of Yemen and
Saudi Arabia with a single theocratic state.
At the heart of this new effort was an unlikely leader. Wuhayshi is a tiny
man, less than five feet tall. In videotapes he sits motionless, his pinched
face blank, his small eyes expressionless. Raymi, the group's burly military
commander, speaks passionately, his hands knifing through the air, his eyes
full of righteous anger. By contrast, Wuhayshi seems almost catatonic.
Yet Al Qaeda men treat him with deep veneration. "When they see him, they
kiss him on the forehead, like a great sheik," said Abdulelah Hider Shaea, a
Yemeni journalist who interviewed Wuhayshi and other Al Qaeda leaders before
the video's release. "They all love and respect him." Shaea, who was
blindfolded and driven out to a remote area for his interview, said Wuhayshi
was laconic but quick-witted, with flashes of sarcastic humor and a
remarkable ability to adduce Koranic verses to back up anything he said.
Wuhayshi's authority seems to derive mostly from his long proximity to bin
Laden, whom he served for six years as a private secretary in Afghanistan.
"During bombing raids, everyone else would scatter, but he would stay by bin
Laden's side," Shaea said, echoing a story other Al Qaeda members told him
about their leader. The founders seem to have been impressed: bin Laden's
deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, issued a statement in November 2008 formally
recognizing Wuhayshi as the emir, or prince, of Al Qaeda in the region.
Shaea and others who have studied him say Wuhayshi appears to be modeling
himself on bin Laden, who has always been more cerebral guide than
day-to-day commander. Wuhayshi left Afghanistan in late 2001 and was
arrested by Iranian authorities; they handed him over two years later to
Yemen, which jailed him without charge. Little is known about his early life
in Abyan province in southern Yemen. Personality aside, he seems to have
much in common with Raymi, his fiery military commander. Both men come from
ordinary families, studied at religious schools and fought in Afghanistan,
according to Shaea and other Yemeni journalists. Both served time afterward
in Yemeni prisons. And both were among the 23 militants who escaped from the
central Sana prison in February 2006.
The two men have also followed bin Laden's example in building an
ever-more-sophisticated propaganda arm for Al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula, including frequent video and audio tapes and an Internet
magazine, Sada al-Malahim (The Echo of Battles), that appears every two
months or so. The magazine makes for bizarre reading, by turns chilling and
poignant. The first page of one recent issue showed a colorful 1950s-style
stock image of a hand that was mixing fluid in a chemical beaker, alongside
a hand grenade and the headline "Year of the Assassination." The authors are
clearly familiar with the style of Western magazine journalism, and many
articles are framed as regular features like View From the Inside and The
Leader's Editorial. There are didactic items, with headlines like "Shariah
Is the Solution" and "Practical Steps Toward the Liberation of Palestine."
But some of the articles are almost whimsical ("A Mujahid's Thoughts"), and
there are sharp satires ("The Saudi Media on Mars"). Much of the content has
an earnest, proselytizing tone, a bit like the ads that Western corporations
publish to trumpet their civic responsibility. One recent article, for
example, was titled "Inside View: Why We're Fighting in the Arabian
Peninsula."
============
Page 9 of 10)
Since it first appeared in early 2008, the magazine has grown steadily more
polished, and the quality of its Koranic scholarship has improved, said
Gregory Johnsen, a Yemen expert at Princeton University who has spent years
tracking Al Qaeda in the region. Its content has mirrored the influx of
Saudi militants into the group, including Said Ali al-Shihri, a former
Guantánamo detainee who is now the deputy emir of Al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula. Perhaps the magazine's most frequent target for abuse is Prince
Muhammad bin Nayef, who directs Saudi Arabia's counterterrorism efforts and
has become heavily involved with Yemen's struggle with Al Qaeda. In August,
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula came close to assassinating bin Nayef when
a Saudi suicide bomber posing as a repentant member of the group was allowed
into the prince's Jedda home and detonated a bomb. Bin Nayef was only
lightly injured. Afterward, Sada al-Malahim published a lengthy defense of
the tactic under the headline "War Is Deception," citing Koranic verses that
approve of deceit as a tool in times of war.
The target audience for all this rhetoric is a bit of a mystery: Internet
access is rare in Yemen, especially in the areas where Al Qaeda operates.
There is evidence that the group may be aiming to win over members of the
military or even the political elite (not an implausible goal, given the
depth of sympathy for jihadism in Yemen). As for the broader public, one
hint came in a video the group released last summer. The 18-minute video,
"The Battle of Marib," about a successful battle with the Yemeni military,
pointedly emphasized the accuracy of Al Qaeda's casualty count. The
narrator, Qassim al-Raymi, mocks the government for failing to acknowledge
that seven soldiers were captured. The video then cuts to a government press
conference, in which a spokesman stumbles badly in response to questions
from journalists and refuses - just as Raymi said- to acknowledge the
soldiers' capture. The video then returns to Raymi, who, facing the camera
almost gloatingly, delivers his message: "I call upon all Muslims to take
their information from clear and correct sources, like the jihadi Web sites
on the Internet."
It is far from clear how Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, based in remote
and desperately underdeveloped areas, turns out such a slick product.
Shaea, the Yemeni journalist who interviewed Al Qaeda's top leaders, told me
he also met four members of the group's media arm in a room that was set up
like a studio, with computers and other equipment. "You could tell they were
rich and well educated," he said. "Some did not look like Arabs. They did
not speak, so I wondered if they even spoke Arabic."
If Wuhayshi and Raymi want to recreate the original Al Qaeda in Yemen, they
also seem to have learned from its mistakes. Starting in 2009, the group
used its Internet magazine and intermittent videos to make increasingly
passionate appeals to the people of Yemen - and especially to its tribes.
The magazine echoed populist discontent about government corruption,
unemployment and unfair distribution of revenue from Yemen's oil, much of
which comes from the very areas where Al Qaeda is active. The articles often
show a deep understanding of local concerns; one issue in 2008 included an
anguished complaint about the government's mishandled response to a flood in
the eastern province of Hadramawt.
Al Qaeda's Afghanistan-based leadership reinforced the tribal message in
early 2009, when Zawahiri issued an audiotape addressed to "the noble and
defiant tribes of Yemen," urging them to rise up against Saleh's government.
"Don't be less than your brothers in the defiant Pashtun and Baluch tribes,"
he said. "Don't be helpers of Ali Abdullah Saleh. . . . Support your
brothers the mujahedeen." At the same time, the group strove to marry
members to tribal women and mediate tribal disputes.
The reason for all this was simple: a global reaction was developing against
militants acting in the name of Al Qaeda, largely because of their extreme
and often indiscriminate violence. In Iraq, the local Al Qaeda branch
alienated tribes that provided crucial support for them in Anbar province,
paving the way for the American-backed "awakening movement" that threw them
out. Wuhayshi and his men clearly wanted to prevent that from happening in
Yemen.
-
Page 10 of 10)
So far the most masterful piece of propaganda by Al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula is still the "Battle of Marib" video. In it, Raymi tells the story
of the Yemeni military's effort to destroy an Al Qaeda cell and capture Aidh
al-Shabwani, a young militant with a lame leg whom one government official
described to me as "a sort of local Robin Hood figure." The raid was a
humiliating failure. The army lost several tanks and armored vehicles to the
guerrillas, who knew the local orange groves and deserts well. The Al Qaeda
men took possession of a weapons convoy and captured seven soldiers, who
were later released.
The video's most striking feature is its anxious plea to tribesmen to resist
payments and pressure from the Yemeni government and its Saudi and American
backers. It starts off with an acknowledgment that the raid took place
because of a "betrayal" by local tribal leaders. Then Raymi intones: "How
shameful it is that some sheiks allow themselves to become soldiers and
slaves of Ali Abdullah Saleh, who is himself but a slave to Saudi riyals and
American dollars. I say to these sheiks: be careful that you don't become a
piece of chewing gum that a person enjoys for a short time and then throws
away." After Raymi and another narrator describe the Al Qaeda victory, the
second narrator offers a more refined formulation, noting that the seven
soldiers' lives were spared: "If you don't support the mujahedeen, then at
least don't stand against them." Since then, the group has released a stream
of statements and videos outlining its basic objectives: to recruit more
followers, overthrow Saleh and use Yemen as a base to attack the Saudi
monarchy and build an Islamic caliphate.
AFTER THE DAWN cruise-missile strike on Rafadh, the open-air tribal meeting
reached a conclusion. The elders decided that Quso and his Al Qaeda gang had
become a threat to the tribes. Two deadly missiles had struck in less than a
week; more might be coming. Tribal hospitality was one thing, and it was a
shame that the five young men were killed. But the presence of Quso and his
recruits was endangering everyone. They had to go. The elders deputized
Ahmed and a fellow tribesman to evict them.
Ahmed told me he sat in his pickup truck with Quso and spoke to him firmly:
"Are you satisfied? All of the people here have been living in the
mountains, in the trees, for a week. Now we want you out, and don't come
back unless you're alone." The Al Qaeda man said nothing. He seemed subdued
and appeared to understand that he could not challenge the tribe's decision.
Ahmed drove Quso out of the valley on a bumpy dirt track. As they drove,
Quso contacted other Al Qaeda members in the area, and they picked them up
one by one. Before long there were 11 men piled into the truck. Ahmed said
he left them on the nearest main road and returned to his valley. A few days
later, Quso came back. This time he was alone. As of mid-February, he still
was living alone in his grandfather's house, according to Jifri, who visited
him there.
Not everyone has reacted to the airstrikes this way. In the neighboring
province of Abyan, an airstrike killed dozens of people, most of them women
and children, according to local witnesses. The civilian death toll created
a groundswell of anger at the Yemeni government and the United States that
was a boon to Al Qaeda recruiters, several local people told me. Ali
al-Shal, an opposition member of the Yemeni Parliament who is from a village
close to where the Abyan airstrikes took place, told me it was too dangerous
for him to visit afterward. Ultimately he was able to visit, but only once
and only by drawing on his family connections with local tribal figures.
"There was not much sympathy for Al Qaeda before, but the strike has created
a lot of sympathy," he said.
IN RECENT WEEKS, Al Qaeda has sounded more confident than ever, issuing
threats and calls to arms, along with publishing its Internet magazine and
introducing an English-language online magazine called Inspire. In May, a
botched air raid led to the death of a tribal leader in Marib who was
negotiating on the government's behalf with a local Al Qaeda leader,
infuriating the local tribes and further eroding President Saleh's
credibility. On June 19, four heavily armed men stormed the fortified
headquarters of the Political Security Organization in the southern port
city of Aden, freeing prisoners suspected of being Al Qaeda members and
escaping unharmed.
Before leaving Yemen, I traveled to Aden. Near the dilapidated oil refinery
built by the British, I found the Quso family home, in a row of simple stone
and concrete bungalows. Fahd's father, Muhammad al-Quso, was just walking up
to the door as I arrived. He was an old man with a deeply lined face,
dressed in a red-and-white futa and headdress. He walked with a cane. Inside
the house he sat down heavily in an armchair and told the story of his son's
life. It was a biography that matched many others in Yemen.
Fahd was born in 1975, his father said, and grew up alongside four brothers
and six sisters. He was a happy child and a good student at the local
elementary school, called al-Saafir. But his parents wanted him to have some
religion, so when he was 14 they sent him - along with some of his friends
from the neighborhood - to a school up north called Dar al-Hadith. The
school is famous as one of the first Wahhabi institutions in Yemen; John
Walker Lindh was reportedly among the future jihadists who studied there.
After he came home, he studied welding at the local technical school. But he
decided not to work at the refinery, as his father had. When I asked about
the accusations that his son took part in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in
2000, he winced and said he didn't believe it. He complained that the
authorities had jailed him, and then later, after freeing him, jailed his
brother-in-law for no reason. Finally, I asked Muhammad whether his son was
a member of Al Qaeda, as the authorities claimed.
"No," he said, "I don't believe this." He was silent for a long time,
staring at the closed door of the house, which was illuminated at its edges
by a bright rectangle of afternoon sunlight. Then he spoke again.
"He is a mujahid," he said, or holy warrior. "He is fighting those who
occupy Arab lands. He is fighting unbelievers."
-
AHMAD GHARABLI
Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and the Yemeni National Defense Council declared a state of emergency March 18 following a violent crackdown on protesters in Sanaa that has reportedly left some 50 people dead and more than 200 wounded. Protests outside the University of Sanaa entrance swelled after Friday prayers, numbering in the tens of thousands. Protests also followed Friday prayers in other parts of the country, including Taiz, Ibb, Hodeidah, Aden and Amran.
Though Yemen’s opposition is a fractured amalgam of students, unemployed youth, Islamists, socialists, Salafists, tribesmen with political ambitions and regular laborers, the movement has coalesced around a call for Saleh and his most politically and militarily empowered relatives to step down. Prior to March 18, roughly 40 protesters were reportedly killed in sporadic crackdowns throughout the country. That death toll has now doubled as the regime has resorted to more forceful tactics in trying to intimidate protesters.
The state of emergency will be used by the regime to impose curfews and restrict media access, but the regime’s attempts to clear the streets of protesters in the capital will be a struggle. Yemen’s opposition is refusing dialogue with the regime, intransigent in its demand for Saleh’s ouster. At the same time, Saleh’s position is deeply entrenched within the regime. By design, the security apparatus and the political and business elite are all dominated by members of his family or Sanhan tribe, making any potential dismantling of the regime an extremely complicated process.
So far, Saleh has retained a significant level of tribal support (even as politically ambitious tribesmen such as Hamid al-Ahmar of the powerful Hashid sheikhdom have called on their allies to withdraw support for Saleh). Saleh’s family and tribal connections that pervade the armed forces have also prevented a major break with the army. Though the crisis in Yemen is escalating, and ongoing discussions on the timing of Saleh’s political departure are intensifying among the regime’s elite, the dismantling of his regime does not appear imminent. Yemen will remain in a protracted political crisis as the timing and mechanics of Saleh’s political exit are sorted out.
Read more: State of Emergency Declared in Yemen | STRATFOR
-
A crisis in Yemen is rapidly escalating. A standoff centered on the presidential palace is taking place between security forces in the capital city of Sanaa while embattled President Ali Abdullah Saleh continues to resist stepping down, claiming that the “majority of Yemeni people” support him. While a Western-led military intervention in Libya is dominating the headlines, the crisis in Yemen and its implications for Persian Gulf stability is of greater strategic consequence. Saudi Arabia is already facing the threat of an Iranian destabilization campaign in eastern Arabia and has deployed forces to Bahrain in an effort to prevent Shiite unrest from spreading. With a second front now threatening the Saudi underbelly, the situation in Yemen is becoming one that the Saudis can no longer leave on the backburner.
The turning point in Yemen occurred March 18 after Friday prayers, when tens of thousands of protestors in the streets calling for Saleh’s ouster came under a heavy crackdown that reportedly left some 46 people dead and hundreds wounded. It is unclear whether the shootings were ordered by Saleh himself, orchestrated by a member of the Yemeni defense establishment to facilitate Saleh’s political exit or simply provoked by tensions in the streets, but it does not really matter. Scores of defections from the ruling party, the prominent Hashid tribe in the north and military old guard followed the March 18 events, both putting Saleh at risk of being removed in a coup and putting the already deeply fractious country at risk of a civil war.
The Army Splits
But the situation in Yemen is also not a replica of the crisis in Egypt, which was not so much a revolution as it was a very carefully managed succession by the country’s armed forces. In Egypt, the armed forces maintained their independence from the unpopular Mubarak regime, thereby providing the armed forces with the unity in command and effort in using the street demonstrations to quietly oust Mubarak. In Yemen, a tribal society at its core, Saleh insured himself by stacking the security apparatus with members of his family and Sanhan tribal village. For example:
Gen. Ahmed Ali Abdullah Saleh, the president’s son, is the commander of the Republican Guard and Yemeni special operations forces. The president originally had planned to have his son succeed him.
Gen. Yahya Mohamed Abdullah Saleh, commander of the Central Security Forces and Counterterrorism Unit, is Saleh’s nephew.
Col. Tareq Mohammed Abdullah Saleh, commander of the Presidential Guard, is Saleh’s nephew.
Col. Ammar Mohammed Abdullah Saleh, commander of the National Security Bureau, is Saleh’s nephew.
Brig. Gen. Mohamed Saleh al-Ahmar, commander of the air force, is Saleh’s half-brother.
Brig. Gen. Ali Saleh al-Ahmar, chief of staff of the general command, is Saleh’s half-brother.
Brig. Gen. Mehdi Makwala, commander of the southern military zone in Aden, is a Hashid tribesman from Saleh’s village, Sanhan.
Brig. Gen. Mohammed Ali Mohsen, commander of the Eastern Military Zone in Hadramawt, is a Hashid tribesman from Sanhan.
However, Saleh cannot rely on the support of all of his relatives. The biggest threat to Saleh within the military apparatus comes from Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, Saleh’s half brother, commander of the first armored brigade and commander of the northwestern military zone. Mohsen is an influential member of Yemen’s old guard and initiated a fresh wave of defections when he announced March 21 that he is joining the people’s revolution and deployed an armored formation to protect the protestors. Armored vehicles under Mohsen’s command are now reportedly surrounding the presidential palace, where Republican Guard units under the command of Saleh’s son, Ahmed, have already taken up defensive positions. The potential for clashes between pro and now anti-Saleh security forces is escalating.
Ali Mohsen may be positioning himself for Saleh’s political exit, but he is unlikely to be a welcome replacement from the U.S. point of view. Ali Mohsen is considered a veteran of the Islamist old guard, who earned its claim to fame during the 1994 civil war, when Saleh relied on Islamists to defeat the more secular and formerly Marxist south. The infusion of jihadists and jihadist sympathizers throughout the Yemeni security apparatus — a critical factor that has compounded counterterrorism efforts in the country — is a product of the Ali Mohsen legacy.
Following Mohsen’s defection and a crisis meeting among senior Yemen defense officials March 21, Yemeni Defense Minister Maj. Gen. Mohammad Nasser Ali asserted that the army would continue to stand behind Saleh and thwart any attempted coups threatening Saleh’s legitimacy. The Yemeni defense minister does not speak for the entire army, however, particularly those forces under the command of Mohsen deploying in the capital city.
Tribal Opportunism
If the army is the first pillar underpinning Saleh’s regime, the second pillar is the tribe. Yemen, much like Libya, is divided among tribal lines, particularly in the north of the country. Though Saleh understands the power of the tribe and has made a concerted effort to maintain his tribal alliances, his biggest threat within Yemen’s tribal landscape comes from Sheikh Hamid al-Ahmar, one of the sons to the late Abdullah bin Hussein al-Ahmar, who ruled the Hashid confederation as the most powerful tribal chieftain in the country. Hamid is a wealthy businessman and a leader of the conservative Islah party that leads the Joint Meetings Party (JMP) opposition coalition. He has obvious political aspirations to become the next leader of Yemen and sees the current uprising as his chance to bring Saleh down. In fact, the first wave of resignations from within the ruling General People’s Congress (GPC) party could be traced back to the al-Ahmar family tree, as relatives and allies were called on to raise the pressure against Saleh.
Still, there are significant arrestors to Hamid’s political rise. The al-Ahmars, while powerful and wealthy, do not speak for the entire Hashid confederation. Many members of both the Hashid and Bakil tribes have said as much publicly. Tribal sheikhs within the Bakil are especially wary of seeing an archrival Hashid leader assume control of Sanaa. In short, Saleh and his remaining loyalists still have some room to maneuver in playing tribal loyalties off each other to preserve his regime, but that room is narrowing.
The Saudi Vote
Yemeni Foreign Minister Dr. Abu-Bakr al-Qirbi is reportedly en route to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to deliver a “Presidential Letter” to the Saudi Monarch. In this letter, Saleh is likely asking for Saudi support for his regime, making the case that his downfall will lead to a fracturing of the country and greater instability for the Arabian Peninsula overall. Saudi support for Saleh is nowhere near assured, however.
Yemen has long had to contend with the fact that Saudi Arabia has the money, influence and tribal links to directly shape Yemeni politics according to its interests. The Saudis view Yemen as a subordinate power on the heel of the Arabian Peninsula, one that (if partitioned in a civil war) could potentially provide Riyadh with direct access to the Arabian Sea, but that if left to fragment, could also spread instability into the Saudi kingdom. The Saudis have thus relied primarily on their tribal links in the country to maintain influence and keep a lid on unrest, thereby keeping the central government in Sanaa weak and dependent on Riyadh for most of its policies.
Given Saudi Arabia’s heavy influence in Yemen, the Saudi view on the situation in Yemen serves as a vital indicator of Saleh’s staying power. More specifically, defections or pledges of support by Yemeni tribal leaders on the Saudi payroll can provide clues on the current Saudi mood toward Yemen. The al-Ahmar family, for example, has extremely close ties to the Saudi royals, and Hamid al-Ahmar has made a point in his recent interviews to praise the Saudis and highlight that he has been traveling between Saudi Arabia and Yemen in recent weeks. At the same time, a number of other prominent tribes close to the Saudis continue to stand by Saleh. Throughout much of Yemen’s crisis, the Saudis did not show signs of abandoning Saleh, but they were not fully backing him, either.
This is likely a reflection of internal Saudi differences as well as limited Saudi resources to deal effectively with Yemen at this point in time. The three Saudi royals who deal most closely with Yemen affairs are King Abdullah, Crown Prince Sultan and Interior Minister and second deputy prime minister Prince Naif. Prince Naif and Crown Prince Sultan have had a very rocky relationship with Saleh and would most likely be amenable to his ouster, while King Abdullah (whose clan rivals the Sudeiri clan, to which Crown Prince Sultan and Prince Naif both belong) has maintained a closer relationship with the Yemeni president. The three often disagree on various facets of Saudi Arabia’s policy toward Yemen. At the same time, the Saudi government has its hands full in dealing with Iran, preventing it from devoting considerable attention to Yemen’s political crisis. Using Bahrain as a flashpoint for sectarian unrest, Iran has been fueling a destabilization campaign throughout eastern Arabia designed to undermine its U.S.-allied Sunni Arab rivals.
Yemen, while ranking much lower on a strategic level than Bahrain, Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, also is not immune to Iran’s agenda. In the northern Yemeni province of Saada, the Yemeni state has struggled to suppress a rebellion by al-Houthis of the Zaydi sect, considered an offshoot of Shiite Islam and heretical by Wahhabi standards. Riyadh fears al-Houthi unrest in Yemen’s north will stir unrest in Saudi Arabia’s southern provinces of Najran and Jizan, which are home to the Ismailis (also an offshoot of Shiite Islam). Ismaili unrest in the south could then embolden Shia in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province, who have already been carrying out demonstrations against the Saudi monarchy with Iranian backing.
(click image to enlarge)
When Saudi Arabia deployed troops in the al-Houthi-Ismaili borderland between Yemen and Saudi Arabia in late 2009, STRATFOR picked up indications that the al-Houthis were receiving some support from Iran, albeit nothing that was considered a game-changer in the rebellion. With unrest spreading throughout eastern Arabia and the Yemeni state falling into a deepening political crisis, the Saudis now have to worry about Iran exploiting a second front through Yemen to threaten the Saudi underbelly. This is in addition to all the other “usual” security issues afflicting Yemen, most notably the threat posed by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which uses Yemen as a staging ground for attempts at more strategic attacks in the Saudi kingdom.
With distractions mounting in the region and Saleh still counting on a large network of familial and tribal ties to hold on to power, Saudi Arabia does not appear to have formed a coherent policy on its southern neighbor. This likely explains quiet complaints by Yemeni officials that they have been getting mixed signals from the Saudi kingdom in dealing with the current crisis. Now that the situation in Yemen has reached a tipping point, the Saudis will have to make a call on Yemen. Both Mohsen and the Al Ahmar family have a close relationship with the Saudis. The Saudi plan for Yemen is still likely being worked out, but any contingency involving a prominent political space for an Islamist like Mohsen is cause for concern for countries like the United States. Though speculation has arisen over a possible Saudi military intervention in Yemen, the likelihood of such a scenario is low. The Saudi royals are unlikely to fend for Saleh at this stage, and even if they did, they would face enormous difficulty in maintaining lines of supply to its southern neighbor to quell swelling unrest in the country when the army and tribal landscape are already split.
Yemen may border Saudi Arabia, but the geography of this part of the Arabian Peninsula poses logistical challenges far greater than what exists between eastern Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. Even if Riyadh decided it wanted to deploy its armed forces to protect Saleh, it would not be as simple as sending troops across a causeway into Sanaa.
Saleh in a Regional Context
Saleh is no doubt a political victim of the current wave of Middle East unrest and faces tougher days ahead in trying to maintain control. But he also finds himself in a very different situation from than Mubarak’s Egypt or Ben Ali’s Tunisia. Both Egypt and Tunisia had institutions, most critically the armed forces, able to stand apart from their unpopular leaders and sacrifice them at the appropriate time. Though Mubarak and Ben Ali had built patronage networks throughout the countries’ ruling parties and business sectors, their family names were not entrenched in the security apparatus, as is Saleh’s.
In some ways, Saleh’s case is more akin to that of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, who presides over a tribal society split along an east-west axis like Yemen’s north-south axis. Though Yemen is more advanced politically and institutionally than Libya, both Gadhafi and Saleh have insulated their regimes by deliberately preventing the development of alternative bases of power, relying mostly on complex tribal alliances and militaries commanded by nepotism to rule. Such regimes take decades to build and an iron fist to maintain, making the removal of a single leader typically more trouble than it is worth. Though the system has worked for more than three decades for Saleh, the president’s carefully managed support network is now rapidly eroding. Saudi Arabia is now being force to make a tough call on the future of Yemen at a time when Riyadh cannot afford another crisis in the Persian Gulf region.
-
With all the global crises going on, it's nice to know we have Joe Biden's foreign policy gravitas helping steer the ship of state.
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20110320/i/r2074244576.jpg?x=400&y=324&q=85&sig=ZAmCqVCBVMc_vjrTb7KD7g--)
Our president obviously feeling the weight of the 3rd. war under his watch.
-
SAN'A—Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is trying to salvage his 32-year rule by negotiating an exit with the towering array of opponents including key military commanders and tribal leaders demanding that he immediately step down.
Back-channel negotiations between the controversial U.S. ally and Maj. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar—a top commander who withdrew his loyalty from the president on Monday—haven't yet yielded a clear transition of power, but the political process so far has succeeded in keeping the power struggle from devolving into military conflict or civil war.
Tanks commanded by Mr. Saleh's son are deployed around the presidential palace in the capital, while tanks manned by forces loyal to Gen. Ahmar have set up nearby, as well near several sensitive government buildings, like the Central Bank, according to residents.
The prognosis of the talks remain unclear, and the threat of military conflict remains a possibility, according to officials in San'a. Saudi Arabia and Yemeni tribal leaders are involved in the negotiations, according to people familiar with the situation, but President Saleh appears to be staking out untenable terms.
His spokesman announced early Tuesday that the leader would agree to step down by the end of the year in favor of a military council taking over. An umbrella group of opposition political parties rejected a similar proposal when the president offered it last month in what appeared to be a bid to end the unceasing street protests against his continued rule.
Now, with the opposition in a stronger bartering position in the wake of the defections of key military leaders, religious figures and tribal elders, opposition leaders say they will accept nothing besides President Saleh's immediate resignation so that the country can start building a new, democratic future.
Latest Mideast News
New Attacks as Allies Remain Divided on Libya
Syrian Protesters Defy Crackdown
Violent Putdowns Intensify Dilemma in Region
.For the U.S., the prospect of an emerging civil war in Yemen and the possibility of losing a controversial but key ally in the war on terror has emerged as a significant national-security concern. Yemen's al Qaeda affiliate has used bases in tribal areas outside of Mr. Saleh's control to launch failed bombing attempts on U.S.-bound planes.
View Slideshow
Muhammed Muheisen/Associated Press
A protester being carried by other demonstrators flashed the victory sign.
.Washington has encouraged Mr. Saleh to loosen the reins and adopt democratic reforms, while spending tens of millions of dollars to train his forces to aid in counterterrorism operations.
The standoff between Mr. Saleh and his opponents has opened the unsavory possibility that U.S.-trained forces could be unleashed to defend the embattled leader. The White House issued a statement saying violence in Yemen would be "unacceptable."
The Yemeni president dispatched his foreign minister to neighboring Saudi Arabia Monday to discuss the situation with the Saudi king, considered Mr. Saleh's strongest foreign benefactor. Mr. Saleh said "the majority" of the country backed him, the state news agency reported.
Mr. Saleh and Gen. Ahmar, the rebel general, exchanged messages through a mediator in efforts to broker an end to the tension, according to a Yemeni official. The official also confirmed that Saudi Arabia was involved in brokering a peaceful transition of power.
Saudi Arabia has helped prop up President Saleh for much of his three decades in power, primarily as a bulwark against extremist threats aimed at the Saudi royal family.
View Full Image
Associated Press
A Yemeni army officer joined protesters demanding the resignation of Yemeni president Saleh on Monday.
.The Saudis also have been financial patrons for many Yemeni tribal figures, giving them leverage to influence how the situation plays out in San'a, according to people familiar with the situation.
The big U.S. concern about the possible ouster of Mr. Saleh is the disposition of the leader who succeeds him; such concerns have been cited by U.S. and Arab officials in explaining their support for the Yemeni president in recent years.
One scenario, if Mr. Saleh were to be removed from power, is a broken state in which terrorism flourishes; another, a tribal-based government unfriendly to the U.S.
A third outcome would be a military-backed leadership that is friendly to the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. Yemeni opposition activists said they were wary of a wide-ranging Saudi role in Yemen, given the conservative kingdom's own reticence to enact political reform.
Saudi Arabia also stepped in recently, against U.S. wishes, to help the Sunni royal family in Bahrain, sending troops to support the monarchy against majority Shiite protesters. That deployment was followed by an intensified Bahraini crackdown on opposition activists.
Some members of the military in Yemen throw in their support for anti-government protesters dealing a blow to President Saleh as he clings to power. Video and image courtesy of Reuters.
.In Yemen, forces aligned against President Saleh coalesced rapidly over the past weekend in the wake of a bloody crackdown against demonstrators who had been camped out in San'a for weeks demanding political overhauls and the resignation of the leader.
Plainclothes gunmen set up on rooftops overlooking the plaza filled with protesters shot and killed more than 50 people and wounded dozens more, according to doctors and witnesses.
The attack catalyzed an anemic protest movement led by opposition parties with unproven grass-roots support and youth activists whose reach didn't venture far from the capital.
By the weekend, leaders of the nation's largest tribes, including Mr. Saleh's own, came out against the president.
On Sunday, Mr. Saleh sacked his government in a bid to assuage criticism of his rule, and state television announced that an investigation into Friday's shooting. The government said it had arrested 16 suspected gunmen.
On Monday, many of the country's elite who hadn't yet taken sides in the dispute declared their loyalties in favor of the protest movement.
Gen. Ahmar, the rebel military commander, served with President Saleh for more than 30 years and was considered one of his closest confidantes.
He was joined by at least four other generals, while local media reported the defections of at least one dozen other officers from the standing army as well as at least one governor and one mayor.
"The crisis is getting more complicated and it's pushing the country toward violence and civil war," Gen. Ahmar—who commands an armored infantry division—said in a statement broadcast by al-Jazeera.
Yemen's defense minister, Nasser Ahmed, spoke on state television Monday evening saying the army still supported the president and would defend him against any "coup against democracy."
It is unclear if Gen. Ahmar's military division has received any U.S. military assistance; much of U.S. aid has been channeled to units under the command of Mr. Saleh's son and nephews.
Mr. Saleh, 66 years old, has been an on-and-off ally of the U.S. in the campaign against al Qaeda. U.S. officials have said the political upheaval has made it difficult for the U.S. to resume airstrikes in Yemen, which were halted in May. Pentagon officials said they were closely following events, which U.S. officials described as "fluid."
"No one in their right mind would predict what might happen in a place like Yemen, but it's true that Saleh's political support has eroded in recent weeks, including inside the Yemeni government," a U.S. official said.
A senior U.S. military official said the chance of Mr. Saleh surviving was less than 50%.
-
By Scott Stewart
While the world’s attention is focused on the combat transpiring in Libya and the events in Egypt and Bahrain, Yemen has also descended into crisis. The country is deeply split over its support for Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, and this profound divide has also extended to the most powerful institutions in the country — the military and the tribes — with some factions calling for Saleh to relinquish power and others supporting him. The tense standoff in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa has served to divert attention (and security forces) from other parts of the country.
On March 28, an explosion at a munitions factory in southern Yemen killed at least 110 people. The factory, which reportedly produced AK rifles and ammunition, was located in the town of Jaar in Abyan province. Armed militants looted the factory March 27, and the explosion reportedly occurred the next day as local townspeople were rummaging through the factory. It is not known what sparked the explosion, but it is suspected to have been an accident, perhaps caused by careless smoking.
The government has reported that the jihadist group Aden-Abyan Islamic Army worked with militant separatists from the south to conduct the raid on the factory. Other sources have indicated to STRATFOR that they believe the raid was conducted by tribesman from Loder. Given the history of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) activity in the Loder area, if the tribesmen were indeed from Loder, it is highly likely they were at least sympathetic to AQAP if not affiliated with the group.
While it is in Saleh’s interest to play up the separatist and jihadist threats as a way of showing international and internal parties how important he is and why he should remain in power, these threats are indeed legitimate. Even in the best of times, there are large portions of Yemen that are under tenuous government control, and the current crisis has enlarged this power vacuum. Because of this lack of government focus and the opportunity to gather weapons in places like Jaar, militant groups such as AQAP, the strongest of al Qaeda’s regional franchise groups, have been provided with a golden opportunity. The question is: Will they be capable of fully exploiting it?
The Situation in Yemen
The raid on the arms factory in Jaar was facilitated by the fact that government security forces had been forced to focus elsewhere. Reports indicate that there was only a company of Yemeni troops in Jaar to guard the factory and that they were quickly overwhelmed by the militants. While the government moved a battalion into Jaar to restore order, those troops had to be taken from elsewhere. This confrontation between troops loyal to Saleh and those led by Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar in the capital city has also caused security forces from both sides to be drawn back to Sanaa in anticipation of a clash. It has also resulted in a vacuum of power in many parts of the country. Currently, government control over large parts of the country varies from town to town, especially in provinces such as Saada, al-Jouf, Shabwa and Abyan, which have long histories of separatist activity.
It is important to understand that Yemen was not a very cohesive entity going into this current crisis, and the writ of the central government has been continually challenged since the country’s founding. Until 1990, Yemen was split into two countries, the conservative, Saudi-influenced Yemen Arab Republic in the north and the Marxist, secular People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen in the south. In 1994, following a peaceful unification in 1990, a bloody civil war was fought between the north and the south. While the north won the war, tensions have remained high between the two sides, and there has long been a simmering anti-government sentiment in the south. This sentiment has periodically manifested itself in outbreaks of armed hostilities between the armed southern separatist movement and government forces.
In Yemen’s northwest, the al-Houthi rebels also have been waging a war of secession against the central government in Sanaa. In the last round of open hostilities, which ended in January 2010, the Yemeni government was unable to quell the uprising, and Saudi Arabia had to commit military forces to help force the al-Houthi rebels to capitulate.
Yemen’s tribes present another challenge to the central government. President Saleh had been able to use a system of patronage and payoffs to help secure the support of the country’s powerful tribes, but this recently has become more difficult with Saudi influence with the tribes eclipsing that of Saleh. In recent weeks, many prominent tribal leaders such as the al-Ahmars have decided to join the opposition and denounce Saleh. The tribes have always been largely independent and have controlled large sections of the country with very little government interference. Government influence there is even less now.
Saleh has also used the conservative tribes and jihadists to help him in his battles against secessionists in both the north and the south. They proved eager to fight the secular Marxists in the south and the Zaydi Shiite al-Houthi in the north. The practice of relying on the conservative tribes and jihadists has also blown back on the Yemeni regime and, as in Pakistan, there are jihadist sympathizers within the Yemeni security apparatus. Because of this dynamic, efforts to locate and root out AQAP elements have been very complicated and limited.
The Yemeni tribes practice a very conservative form of Islam, and their tribal traditions are in many ways similar to the Pashtunwali code in Pakistan. According to this tradition, any guest of the tribe — such as an al Qaeda militant — is vigorously protected once welcomed. They will also protect “sons of the tribe,” such as American-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a member of the powerful Awlak tribe (the Yemeni prime minister is the uncle of al-Awlaki’s father). The AQAP leadership has further exploited this tribal tradition by shrewdly marrying into many of the powerful tribes in order to solidify the mantle of protection they provide.
Opportunities
In late 2009, in the wake of the Christmas Day plot to destroy Northwest Airlines Flight 253, the Fort Hood shootings and the attempted assassination of the Saudi deputy interior minister, STRATFOR believed that 2010 was going to see a concerted effort by the Yemenis to destroy the AQAP organization. As 2010 passed, it became clear that, despite the urging and assistance of their U.S. and Saudi allies, the Yemenis had been unable to cause much damage to AQAP as an organization, and as evidenced by the Oct. 29, 2010, cargo-bomb attempt, AQAP finished 2010 stronger than we had anticipated.
In fact, as we entered 2011, AQAP had moved to the forefront of the international jihadist movement on the physical battlefield and had also begun to take a leading role in the ideological realm due to a number of factors, including the group’s popular Arabic-language online magazine Sada al-Malahim, the emergence of AQAP’s English-language Inspire magazine and the increased profile and popularity of al-Awlaki.
As we noted last month regarding Libya, jihadists have long thrived in chaotic environments such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia. Indeed, this is exactly why the leadership of AQAP left Saudi Arabia and relocated to the more permissive environment of Yemen. Unlike the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, AQAP is active, has attempted to conduct a number of transnational attacks, and has sought to encourage grassroots jihadists across the globe to think globally and attack locally. With the government of Yemen unable to prosecute a successful campaign against AQAP in 2010, the chance of them making much progress against the group in 2011 amid the current crisis is even more remote.
The United States has spent the past several years training up a “new guard” within the Yemeni security apparatus — mainly the Counter Terrorism Unit, National Security Bureau, Special Forces and Central Security Forces, which are all led by Saleh’s relatives — in an effort to counterbalance the influence of the Islamist old guard in the military (led by Saleh’s big competitor right now, Ali Mohsin). These select forces are now being tasked with protecting the Saleh regime against dissident units of the Yemeni military, which means there is no one left on the Yemeni side to focus on AQAP. This situation is likely to persist for some time as the standoff progresses and even after the installation of a new government, which will have to sort things out and deal with the separatist issues in the north and south. Indeed, these issues are seen as more pressing threats to the regime than AQAP and the jihadists.
If there is a transition of power in Yemen, and Mohsin and his faction come to power, there is likely to be a purge of these new guard forces and their leadership, which is loyal to Saleh. The result will be a removal of the new guard and an increase in the influence of the Islamists and jihadist sympathizers in the Yemeni security and intelligence apparatus. This could have a significant impact on U.S. counterterrorism efforts in Yemen, and provide a significant opportunity for AQAP.
The violence and civil unrest wracking Yemen has almost certainly curtailed the ability of American intelligence officers to travel, meet with people and collect much information pertaining to AQAP, especially in places that have fallen under militant control. Additionally, the attention of U.S. intelligence agencies has in all likelihood been diverted to the task of trying to gather intelligence pertaining to what is happening with Saleh and the opposition rather than what is happening with AQAP. This will likely provide AQAP with some breathing room.
The United States has been quietly active in Yemen, albeit in a limited way, under the auspices of the Yemeni government. If the Islamist old guard in the military assumes power, it is quite likely that this operational arrangement will not continue — at least not initially. Because of this, should the United States believe that the Saleh regime is about to fall, it may no longer be concerned about alienating the tribes that have supported Saleh, and if it has somehow obtained good intelligence regarding the location of various high-value AQAP targets, it may feel compelled to take unilateral action to attack those targets. Such an operational window will likely be limited, however, and once Saleh leaves, such opportunities will likely be lost.
If the United States is not able to take such unilateral action, AQAP will have an excellent opportunity to grow and flourish due to the preoccupation of Yemeni security forces with other things, and the possibility of having even more sympathizers in the government. Not only will this likely result in fewer offensive operations against AQAP in the tribal areas, but the group will also likely be able to acquire additional resources and weapons.
In the past, the leadership of AQAP has shown itself to be shrewd and adaptable, although the group has not displayed a high degree of tactical competence in past attacks against hard targets such as the U.S. Embassy in Sanaa and the British ambassador. Still, AQAP has come very close to succeeding in a number of failed yet innovative attacks outside of Yemen, including the assassination attempt against Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, the Christmas Day 2009 underwear-bomb plot and the UPS printer-bomb plot in October 2009, and the window of opportunity that is opening for the group is sure to cause a great deal of angst in Washington, Riyadh and a number of European capitals. It remains to be seen if AQAP can take advantage of the situation in Yemen to conduct a successful attack outside of the country (or a hard target within the country) and finally make it into the terrorist big leagues.
Read more: AQAP and the Vacuum of Authority in Yemen | STRATFOR
-
Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Sun, April 03, 2011 -- 8:18 PM ET
-----
U.S. Shifts to Seek Removal of Yemen's Leader, an Ally
The United States, which long supported Yemen's president,
even in the face of recent widespread protests, has now
quietly shifted positions and has concluded that he is
unlikely to bring about the required reforms and must be
eased out of office, according to American and Yemeni
officials.
The American position began to shift in the past week,
administration officials said. While American officials have
not publicly pressed President Ali Abdullah Saleh to go, they
have told allies and some reporters that they now view his
hold on office as untenable, and they believe he should
leave.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/world/middleeast/04yemen.html?emc=na
-
I'm sure this will work out well.
-
I saw some report on Fox the other day that AQ has set up an emirate in southern Yemen but have not seen any confirmation elsewhere.
BTW, GM, what would you suggest here?
-
I think we should continue the long democratic tradition of abandoning our allies to horrible deaths. Ask the S. Vietnamese how fighting along side us paid off.
-
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/al-qaeda-quickly-fills-void-as-obama-administration-pushes-yemeni-president-from-power/
Al-Qaeda Quickly Fills Void as Obama Administration Pushes Yemeni President From Power
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 5:24 AM
As Yemeni President and American ally Ali Abdullah Saleh fights for his political life, Al Qaeda operatives are taking advantage of the void and have already stepped in to fill the power vacuum.
Al Qaeda leaders like top propagandist and spiritual leader Anwar Al-Awlaki are ecstatic about the recent developments in Yemen and across the Middle East.
The New York Times reported:
Counterterrorism operations in Yemen have ground to a halt, allowing Al Qaeda’s deadliest branch outside of Pakistan to operate more freely inside the country and to increase plotting for possible attacks against Europe and the United States, American diplomats, intelligence analysts and counterterrorism officials say.
In the political tumult surrounding Yemen’s embattled president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, many Yemeni troops have abandoned their posts or have been summoned to the capital, Sana, to help support the tottering government, the officials said. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the group’s affiliate, has stepped in to fill this power vacuum, and Yemeni security forces have come under increased attacks in recent weeks.
A small but steadily growing stream of Qaeda fighters and lower-level commanders from other parts of the world, including Pakistan, are making their way to Yemen to join the fight there, although American intelligence officials are divided on whether the political crisis in Yemen is drawing more insurgents than would be traveling there under normal conditions.
Obama Administration officials are doing their best to ensure Al-Qaeda’s success.
KBOI reported:
The Obama administration is helping to grease the skids for the impending departure of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
While he remains a strong U.S. ally in the war against al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists, Saleh has worn out his welcome with his own people and the State Department can’t afford to prop up a leader opposed to democratic reform.
Yemeni officials say the U.S. is attempting to mediate a smooth exit for Saleh so as not to further destabilize the country, which is in danger of falling into the hands of those supporting al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the anti-American organization that’s headquartered in Yemen.
Al Qaeda already declared South Yemen as an Islamic emirate last week.
-
Islamist Militancy in a Pre- and Post-Saleh Yemen
April 21, 2011
By Reva Bhalla
Nearly three months have passed since the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, first saw mass demonstrations against Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, but an exit from the current stalemate is still nowhere in sight. Saleh retains enough support to continue dictating the terms of his eventual political departure to an emboldened yet frustrated opposition. At the same time, the writ of his authority beyond the capital is dwindling, which is increasing the level of chaos and allowing various rebel groups to collect arms, recruit fighters and operate under dangerously few constraints.
The prospect of Saleh’s political struggle providing a boon to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is understandably producing anxiety in Washington, where U.S. officials have spent the past few months trying to envision what a post-Saleh Yemen would mean for U.S. counterterrorism efforts in the Arabian Peninsula.
While fending off opponents at home, Saleh and his followers have been relying on the “me or chaos” tactic abroad to hang onto power. Loyalists argue that the dismantling of the Saleh regime would fundamentally derail years of U.S. investment designed to elicit meaningful Yemeni cooperation against AQAP or, worse, result in a civil war that will provide AQAP with freedom to hone its skills. Emboldened by the recent unrest, a jihadist group called the Abyan-Aden Islamic Army launched a major raid on a weapons depot in Ja’ar in late March, leading a number of media outlets to speculate that the toppling of the Saleh regime would play directly into the hands of Yemen’s jihadists.
Meanwhile, the opposition has countered that the Yemeni jihadist threat is a perception engineered by Saleh to convince the West of the dangers of abandoning support for his regime. Opposition figures argue that Saleh’s policies are what led to the rise of AQAP in the first place and that the fall of his regime would provide the United States with a clean slate to address its counterterrorism concerns with new, non-Saleh-affiliated political allies. The reality is likely somewhere in between.
The Birth of Yemen’s Modern Jihadist Movement
The pervasiveness of radical Islamists in Yemen’s military and security apparatus is no secret, and it contributes to the staying power of al Qaeda and its offspring in the Arabian Peninsula. The root of the issue dates back to the Soviet-Afghan war, when Osama bin Laden, whose family hails from the Hadramout region of the eastern Yemeni hinterland, commanded a small group of Arab volunteers under the leadership of Abdullah Azzam in the Islamist insurgency against the Soviets through the 1980s. Yemenis formed one of the largest contingents within bin Laden’s Arab volunteer force in Afghanistan, which meant that by 1989, a sizable number of battle-hardened Yemenis returned home looking for a new purpose.
They did not have to wait long. Leading the jihadist pack returning from Afghanistan was Tariq al Fadhli of the once-powerful al Fadhli tribe based in the southern Yemeni province of Abyan. Joining al Fadhli was Sheikh Abdul Majid al Zindani, the spiritual father of Yemen’s Salafi movement and one of the leaders of the conservative Islah party (now leading the political opposition against Saleh). The al Fadhli tribe had lost its lands to the Marxists of the Yemeni Socialist Party (YSP), which had ruled South Yemen with Soviet backing throughout the 1980s while North Yemen was ruled with Saudi backing. Al Fadhli, an opportunist who tends to downplay his previous interactions with bin Laden, returned to his homeland in 1989 (supposedly with funding from bin Laden) with a mission backed by North Yemen and Saudi Arabia to rid the south of Marxists. He and his group set up camp in the mountains of Saada province on the Saudi border and also established a training facility in Abyan province in South Yemen. Joining al Fadhli’s group were a few thousand Arabs from Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan who had fought in Afghanistan and faced arrest or worse if they tried to return home.
When North and South Yemen unified in 1990 following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Yemen’s tribal Salafists, still trying to find their footing, were largely pushed aside as the southern Marxists became part of the new Republic of Yemen, albeit as subjugated partners to the north. Many within the Islamist militant movement shifted their focus to foreign targets — with an eye on the United States — and rapidly made their mark in December 1992, when two hotels were bombed in the southern city of Aden, where U.S. soldiers taking part in Operation Restore Hope in Somalia were lodged (though no Americans were killed in the attack). A rocket attack against the U.S. Embassy in January 1993 was also attempted and failed. Though he denied involvement in the hotel attacks, al Fadhli and many of his jihadist compatriots were thrown in jail on charges of orchestrating the hotel bombings as well as the assassination of one of the YSP’s political leaders.
But as tensions intensified between the north and the south in the early 1990s, so did the utility of Yemen’s Islamist militants. Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh brokered a deal in 1993 with al Fadhli in which the militant leader was released from jail and freed of all charges in exchange for his assistance in defeating the southern socialists, who were now waging a civil war against the north. Saleh’s plan worked. The southern socialists were defeated and stripped of much of their land and fortunes, while the jihadists who made Saleh’s victory possible enjoyed the spoils of war. Al Fadhli, in particular, ended up becoming a member of Saleh’s political inner circle. In tribal custom, he also had his sister marry Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, a member of the president’s Sanhan tribe in the influential Hashid confederation and now commander of Yemen’s northwestern military division and 1st Armored Brigade. (Mohsen, known for his heavily Islamist leanings, has been leading the political standoff against Saleh ever since his high-profile defection from the regime March 24.)
The Old Guard Rises and Falls
Saleh’s co-opting of Yemen’s Islamist militants had profound implications for the country’s terrorism profile. Islamists of varying ideological intensities were rewarded with positions throughout the Yemeni security and intelligence apparatus, with a heavy concentration in the Political Security Organization (PSO), a roughly 150,000-strong state security and intelligence agency. The PSO exists separately from the Ministry of Interior and is supposed to answer directly to the president, but it has long operated autonomously and is believed to have been behind a number of large-scale jailbreaks, political assassinations and militant operations in the country. While the leadership of the PSO under Ghaleb al Ghamesh have maintained their loyalty to Saleh, the loyalty of the organization as a whole to the president is highly questionable.
Many within the military-intelligence-security apparatus who fought in the 1994 civil war to defeat South Yemen and formed a base of support around Saleh’s presidency made up what is now considered the “old guard” in Yemen. Interspersed within the old guard were the mujahideen fighters returning from Afghanistan. Leading the old guard within the military has been none other than Mohsen, who, after years of standing by Saleh’s side, has emerged in the past month as the president’s most formidable challenger. Mohsen, whose uncle was married to Saleh’s mother in her second marriage, was a stalwart ally of Saleh’s throughout the 1990s. He played an instrumental role in protecting Saleh from coup attempts early on in his political reign and led the North Yemen army to victory against the south in the 1994 civil war. Mohsen was duly rewarded with ample military funding and control over Saada, Hudeidah, Hajja, Amran and Mahwit, surpassing the influence of the governors in these provinces.
While the 1990s were the golden years for Mohsen, the 21st century brought with it an array of challenges for the Islamist sympathizers in the old guard. Following the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, Saleh came under enormous pressure from the United States to crack down on al Qaeda operatives and their protectors in Yemen, both within and beyond the bounds of the state. Fearful of the political backlash that would result from U.S. unilateral military action in Yemen and tempted by large amounts of counterterrorism aid being channeled from Washington, Saleh began devising a strategy to gradually marginalize the increasingly problematic old guard.
These were not the only factors driving Saleh’s decision, however. Saleh knew he had to prepare a succession plan, and he preferred to see the next generation of Saleh men at the helm. Anticipating the challenge he would face from powerful figures like Mohsen and his allies, Saleh shrewdly created new and distinct security agencies for selected family members to run under the tutelage of the United States with the those agencies run by formidable members of the old guard. Thus the “new guard” was born.
The Rise of Saleh’s Second-Generation New Guard
Over the course of the past decade, Saleh has made a series of appointments to mark the ascendancy of the new guard. Most important, his son and preferred successor, Ahmed Ali Saleh, became head of the elite Republican Guard (roughly 30,000-plus men) and Special Operations Forces. Ahmad replaced Saleh’s half-brother, Mohammed Saleh al Ahmar, as chief of the Republican Guard, but Saleh made sure to appease Mohammed by making him Yemen’s defense attache in Washington, followed by appointing him to the highly influential post of chief of staff of the supreme commander of the Armed Forces and supervisor to the Republican Guard.
The president also appointed his nephews — the sons of his brother Muhammad Abdullah Saleh (now deceased) — to key positions. Yahya became chief of staff of the Central Security Forces and Counter-Terrorism Unit (roughly 50,000 plus); Tariq was made commander of the Special Guard (which effectively falls under the authority of Ahmed’s Republican Guard); and Ammar became principal duty director of the National Security Bureau (NSB). Moreover, nearly all of Saleh’s sons, cousins and nephews are evenly distributed throughout the Republican Guard.
Each of these agencies received a substantial amount of money as U.S. financial aid to Yemen increased from $5 million in 2006 to $155 million in 2010. This was expected to rise to $1 billion or more over the next several years, but Washington froze the first installment in February when the protests broke out. Ahmed’s Republican Guard and Special Operations Forces worked closely with U.S. military trainers in trying to develop an elite fighting force along the lines of Jordan’s U.S.-trained Fursan al Haq (Knights of Justice). The creation of the mostly U.S.-financed NSB in 2002 to collect domestic intelligence was also part of a broader attempt by Saleh to reform all security agencies to counter the heavy jihadist penetration of the PSO.
Meanwhile, Mohsen watched nervously as his power base flattened under the weight of the second-generation Saleh men. One by one, Mohsen’s close old-guard allies were replaced: In 2007, Saleh sacked Gen. Al Thaneen, commander of the Republican Guard in Taiz. In 2008, Brig. Gen. Mujahid Gushaim replaced Ali Sayani, the head of military intelligence (Ali Sayani’s brother, Abdulmalik, Yemen’s former defense minister, was one of the first generals to declare support for the revolt against Saleh); The same year, Gen. Al Thahiri al Shadadi was replaced by Brig Gen. Mohammed al Magdashi as Commander of the Central Division; Saleh then appointed his personal bodyguard Brig. Gen. Aziz Mulfi as Chief of Staff of the 27th mechanized brigade in Hadramout. Finally, in early 2011, Saleh sacked Brig. Gen. Abdullah Al Gadhi, commander of Al Anad Base that lies on the axis of Aden in the south and commander of the 201st mechanized brigade. As commander of the northwestern division, Mohsen had been kept busy by an al Houthi rebellion that ignited in 2004, and he became a convenient scapegoat for Saleh when the al Houthis rose up again in 2009 and began seizing territory, leading to a rare Saudi military intervention in Yemen’s northern Saada province.
Using the distraction and intensity of the Houthi rebellion to weaken Mohsen and his forces, Saleh attempted to move the headquarters of Mohsen’s First Armored Brigade from Sanaa to Amran just north of the capital and ordered the transfer of heavy equipment from Mohsen’s forces to the Republican Guard. While Saleh’s son and nephews were on the receiving end of millions of dollars of U.S. financial aid to fight AQAP, Mohsen and his allies were left on the sidelines as the old-guard institutions were branded as untrustworthy and thus unworthy of U.S. financing. Mohsin also claims Saleh tried to have him killed at least six times. One such episode, revealed in a Wikileaks cable dated February 2010, describes how the Saleh government allegedly provided Saudi military commanders with the coordinates of Mohsen’s headquarters when Saudi forces were launching air strikes on the Houthis. The Saudis aborted the strike when they sensed something was wrong with the information they were receiving from the Yemeni government.
Toward the end of 2010, with the old guard sufficiently weakened, Saleh was feeling relatively confident that he would be able to see through his plans to abolish presidential term limits and pave the way for his son to take power. What Saleh didn’t anticipate was the viral effect of the North African uprisings and the opportunity they would present to Mohsen and his allies to take revenge and, more important, make a comeback.
(click here to enlarge image)
An Old Guard Revival?
Mohsen, 66, is a patient and calculating man. When thousands of Yemenis took to the streets of Sanaa in late March to protest against the regime, his 1st Armored Brigade, based just a short distance from the University of Sanaa entrance where the protesters were concentrated, deliberately stood back while the CSF and Republican Guard took the heat for increasingly violent crackdowns. In many ways, Mohsen attempted to emulate Egyptian Field Marshal Mohammed Tantawi in having his forces stand between the CSF and the protesters, acting as a protector of the pro-democracy demonstrators in hopes of making his way to the presidential palace with the people’s backing. Mohsen continues to carry a high level of respect among the Islamist-leaning old guard and, just as critically, maintains a strong relationship with the Saudi royals.
Following his March 24 defection, a number of high-profile military, political and tribal defections followed. Standing in league with Mohsen is the politically ambitious Sheikh Hamid al-Ahmar, one of the 10 sons of the late Abdullah bin Hussein al-Ahmar, who ruled the Hashid confederation as the most powerful tribal chieftain in the country and was also a prominent leader of the Islah political party. (Saleh’s Sanhaan tribe is part of the Hashid confederation as well.) Hamid is a wealthy businessman and vocal leader of the Islah party, which dominates the Joint Meetings Party (JMP), an opposition coalition. The sheikh who, like Mohsen, has a close relationship with the Saudi royals, has ambitions to replace Saleh and has been responsible for a wave of defections from within the ruling General People’s Congress, nearly all of which can be traced back to his family tree. In an illustration of Hamid’s strategic alliance with Mohsen, Hamid holds the position of lieutenant colonel in the 1st Armored Brigade. This is a purely honorary position but provides Hamid with a military permit to expand his contingent of body guards, the numbers of which of recently swelled to at least 100.
Together, Mohsen and Sheikh Hamid have a great deal of influence in Yemen to challenge Saleh, but still not enough to drive him out of office by force. Mohsen’s forces have been gradually trying to encroach on Sanaa from their base in the northern outskirts of the capital, but forces loyal to Saleh in Sanaa continue to outman and outgun the rebel forces.
Hence the current stalemate. Yemen does not have the luxury of a clean, geographic split between pro-regime and anti-regime forces, as is the case in Libya. In its infinite complexity, the country is divided along tribal, family, military and business lines, so its political future is difficult to chart. A single family, army unit, village or tribe will have members pledging loyalty to either Saleh or the revolution, providing the president with just enough staying power to deflect opposition demands and drag out the political crisis.
Washington’s Yemen Problem
The question of whether Saleh stays or goes is not the main topic of current debate. Nearly every party to the conflict, including the various opposition groups, Saudi Arabia, the United States and even Saleh himself, understand that the Yemeni president’s 33-year political reign will end soon. The real sticking point has to do with those family members surrounding Saleh and whether they, too, will be brought down with the president in a true regime change.
This is where the United States finds itself in a particularly uncomfortable spot. Yemen’s opposition, a hodgepodge movement including everything from northern Islamists to southern socialists, are mostly only united by a collective aim to dismantle the Saleh regime, including the second-generation Saleh new guard that has come to dominate the country’s security-military-intelligence apparatus with heavy U.S.-backing.
The system is far from perfect, and counterterrorism efforts in Yemen continue to frustrate U.S. authorities. However, Saleh’s security reforms over the past several years and the tutelage the U.S. military has been able to provide to these select agencies have been viewed as a significant sign of progress by the United States, and that progress could now be coming under threat.
Mohsen and his allies are looking to reclaim their lost influence and absorb the new-guard entities in an entirely new security set-up. For example, the opposition is demanding that the Republican Guard and Special Forces be absorbed into the army, which would operate under a general loyal to Mohsen (Mohsen himself claims he would step down as part of a deal in which Saleh also resigns, but he would be expected to assume a kingmaker status), that the CSF and CTU paramilitary agencies be stripped of their autonomy and operationally come under the Ministry of Interior and that the newly created NSB come under the PSO. Such changes would be tantamount to unraveling the past decade of U.S. counterterrorism investment in Yemen that was designed explicitly to raise a new generation of security officials who could hold their own against the Islamist-leaning old guard. This is not to say that Mohsen and his allies would completely obstruct U.S. counterterrorism efforts. Many within the old guard, eager for U.S. financial aid and opposed to U.S. unilateral military action in Yemen, are likely to veer toward pragmatism in dealing with Washington. That said, Mohsen’s reputation for protecting jihadists operating in Yemen and his poor standing with Washington would add much distrust to an already complicated U.S.-Yemeni relationship.
Given its counterterrorism concerns and the large amount of U.S. financial aid flowing into Yemen in recent years, Washington undoubtedly has a stake in Yemen’s political transition, but it is unclear how much influence it will be able to exert in trying to shape a post-Saleh government. The United States lacks the tribal relationships, historical presence and trust to deal effectively with a resurgent old guard seeking vengeance amid growing chaos.
The real heavyweight in Yemen is Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royals have long viewed their southern neighbor as a constant source of instability in the kingdom. Whether the threat to the monarchy emanating from Yemen drew its roots from Nasserism, Marxism or radical Islamism, Riyadh deliberated worked to keep the Yemeni state weak while buying loyalties across the Yemeni tribal landscape. Saudi Arabia shares the U.S. concern over Yemeni instability providing a boon to AQAP. The Saudi royals, which are reviled by a large segment of Saudi-born jihadists in AQAP operating from Yemen, is a logical target for AQAP attacks that carry sufficient strategic weight to shake the oil markets and the royal regime, especially given the current climate of unrest in the region. Moreover, Saudi Arabia does not want to deal with a dramatic increase in the already regular spillover of refugees, smugglers and illegal workers from Yemen should civil war ensue.
At the same time, Saudi Arabia and the United States may not entirely see eye to eye in how to manage the jihadist threat in Yemen. The Saudis have maintained close linkages with a number of influential Islamist members within the old guard, including Mohsen and jihadists like al Fadhli, who broke off his alliance with Saleh in 2009 to lead the Southern Movement against the regime. The Saudis are also more prone to rely on their jihadist allies from time to time in trying to snuff out more immediate threats to Saudi interests.
For example, Saudi Arabia’s current concern regarding Yemen centers not on the future of Yemen’s counterterrorism capabilities but on the al Houthi rebels in the north, who have wasted little time in exploiting Sanaa’s distractions to expand their territorial claims in Saada province. The Houthis belong to the Zaydi sect, considered an offshoot of Shiite Islam and heretical by Wahhabi standards. Riyadh fears Houthi unrest in Yemen’s north could stir unrest in Saudi Arabia’s southern provinces of Najran and Jizan, which are home to the Ismailis, also an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Ismaili unrest in the south could then embolden Shia in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province, who have already been engaged in demonstrations, albeit small ones, against the Saudi monarchy with heavy Iranian encouragement. Deputy AQAP leader Saad Ali al Shihri’s declaration of war against the al Houthi rebels on Jan. 28 may have surprised many, but it also seemed to play to the Saudi agenda in channeling jihadist efforts toward the al Houthi threat.
The United States has a Yemen problem that it cannot avoid, but it also has very few tools with which to manage or solve it. For now, the stalemate provides Washington with the time to sort out alternatives to the second-generation Saleh relatives, but that time also comes at a cost. The longer this political crisis drags on, the more Saleh will narrow his focus to holding onto Sanaa, while leaving the rest of the country for the Houthis, the southern socialists and the jihadists to fight over. The United States can take some comfort in the fact that AQAP’s poor track record of innovative yet failed attacks has kept the group in the terrorist minor leagues. With enough time, resources and sympathizers in the government and security apparatus, however, AQAP could find itself in a more comfortable spot in a post-Saleh scenario, likely to the detriment of U.S. counterterrorism efforts in the Arabian Peninsula.
-
Thanks to Strat - and Crafty - for keeping watch on the turmoil in Yemen, a key location for al Qaida on the Arabian Peninsula. See if this map comes through, but Yemen shares a 'sea border' with Somalia / the horn of Africa, a home al Qaida, Blackhawk down, and base for the ruthless pirate sea war operation that is stealing, killing and taking over anything everything up to the size of oil tankers that tries to pass through.
(http://i.infoplease.com/images/myemen.gif)
-
Somebody call NATO!
Kidding...... :roll:
-
In a rather terrifying way, that was rather funny GM.
Worth noting here IMHO is that the rationale for our efforts in Afpakia of preventing the return of AQ training bases for attacks upon the American homeland, is in tatters. AQ now establishes training bases in Yemen, the Horn of Africa, (and with the help of President Baraq in Libya too?-- though this remains to be seen). If we are not going to go in and stop them all (and I suspect no one here is calling for boots on the ground in Yemen!) then what is the point of going into just one (Afpakia)?
Our strategy is utterly incoherent.
Those who wish to comment on this point should please do so either on the US Foreign Policy thread or the Middle East/SNAFU thread.
-
By Scott Stewart
On May 5, a Hellfire missile fired from a U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) struck a vehicle in the town of Nissab in Yemen’s restive Shabwa province. The airstrike reportedly resulted in the deaths of two Yemeni members of the Yemen-based al Qaeda franchise group al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and injured a third AQAP militant. Subsequent media reports indicated that the strike had targeted Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S.-born member of AQAP, but had failed to kill him.
The May 5 strike was not the first time al-Awlaki had been targeted and missed. On Dec. 24, 2009 (a day before the failed AQAP Christmas Day bombing attempt against Northwest Airlines Flight 253), an airstrike and ground assault was launched against a compound in the al-Said district of Shawba province that intelligence said was the site of a major meeting of AQAP members. The Yemeni government initially indicated that the attack had killed al-Awlaki along with several senior AQAP members, but those reports proved incorrect.
In 2009 and 2010, the United States conducted other strikes against AQAP in Yemen, though most of those strikes reportedly involved Tomahawk cruise missiles and carrier-based fixed-wing aircraft. Still, the United States has reportedly used UAVs to attack targets in Yemen on a number of occasions. In November 2002, the CIA launched a UAV strike against Abu Ali al-Harithi and five confederates in Marib. That strike essentially decapitated the al Qaeda node in Yemen and greatly reduced its operational effectiveness for several years. There are also reports that a May 24, 2010, strike may have been conducted by a UAV. However, that strike mistakenly killed the wrong target, which generated a great deal of anger among Yemen’s tribes, who then conducted armed attacks against pipelines and military bases. The use of airstrikes against AQAP was heavily curtailed after that attack.
All this is to say that a UAV strike in Yemen is not particularly surprising — nor is a strike targeting AQAP or al-Awlaki. Indeed, we noted in January our belief that AQAP had eclipsed the al Qaeda core on the physical battlefield due to the efforts of its tactical commanders and on the ideological battlefield due to the efforts of its propaganda wing, Al-Malahem Media.
One thing that has struck us as odd about the May 5 airstrike, however, is the way al-Awlaki has been characterized in the press. Several media outlets have referred to him as the leader of AQAP, which he clearly is not (he is not even the group’s primary religious leader). Other reports have even speculated that al-Awlaki could be in line to become the global leader of the jihadist movement following the death of Osama bin Laden. In light of such statements, it seems a fitting time to discuss once again the leadership of AQAP and to examine al-Awlaki’s role within the organization.
Stepping Into the Void
Yemen became a focus of U.S. counterterrorism efforts following the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Aden, Yemen; the 9/11 attacks; and the October 2002 bombing attack against the oil tanker Limburg off the Yemeni coast. As noted above, following the November 2002 UAV strike that killed Abu Ali al-Harithi, the jihadists in Yemen entered a period of disorganization and operational dormancy. This period was also marked by the arrests and imprisonment of several important Yemeni jihadists. There remained many jihadists in Yemen, and many more sympathizers, but the movement in Yemen lacked effective leadership and direction.
This leadership void was filled by a man named Nasir al-Wahayshi, who is also known by the honorific name, or kunya, Abu Basir. Al-Wahayshi is an ethnic Yemeni who spent time in Afghanistan while allegedly working closely with Osama bin Laden. Some reports even indicate al-Wahayshi was bin Laden’s personal secretary. Al-Wahayshi fled Afghanistan following the battle at Tora Bora and went to Iran, where he was arrested by the government of Iran in late 2001 or early 2002. Al-Wahayshi was repatriated to Yemen in 2003 through an extradition deal with the Iranian government and subsequently escaped from a high-security prison outside Sanaa in February 2006, along with 22 other jihadists. Other escapees in the group included Jamal al-Badawi, who is wanted by U.S. officials for his alleged role as the leader of the cell that carried out the suicide bombing of the USS Cole, and Qasim al-Raymi, who became AQAP’s military leader. Al-Raymi is said to be an aggressive, ruthless and fierce fighter (some have likened him to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi). Al-Raymi has also been unsuccessfully targeted by an airstrike.
Following the 2006 prison break, there was a notable change in jihadist activity in Yemen. In September 2006 there was an attack involving dual vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs) against oil facilities. This was the first use of VBIEDs on land in Yemen (large IEDs in boats had been used in the USS Cole and Limburg attacks).
Al-Wahayshi was able to establish control of Yemen’s ramshackle network of jihadists by mid 2007, bringing a resurgence to jihadist operations in Yemen. By January 2009, the remnants of the Saudi al Qaeda franchise had fled Saudi Arabia for Yemen and declared their loyalty to al-Wahayshi. It is notable that the Saudi contingent swore allegiance to al-Wahayshi because it indicated that the merger of the Saudi and Yemeni jihadist entities was not a merger of equals. A hierarchy had been established for AQAP with al-Wahayshi at the top, a testament to his leadership.
At the time of the merger, Saudi national (and former Guantanamo detainee) Said Ali al-Shihri was named as al-Wahayshi’s deputy. Another notable Saudi who joined the group during the union was Ibrahim Hassan Tali al-Asiri, who has become AQAP’s chief bombmaker and the mastermind behind the innovative IEDs used in AQAP’s attacks. Also joining AQAP at this time was a Saudi cleric named Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaish, who reportedly earned a degree in Islamic law from Muhammad Ibn-Saud University and would become the group’s mufti, or religious leader. Al-Rubaish fought with bin Laden and al-Wahayshi at Tora Bora, and shortly after the battle he was arrested and detained at Guantanamo Bay until 2006, when he was returned to Saudi Arabia. After completing the Saudi rehabilitation program, al-Rubaish fled to Yemen, where he joined AQAP. The relationship between AQAP figures such as al-Wahayshi and al-Rubaish and bin Laden helps explain why AQAP has been the franchise jihadist group that is the closest ideologically to the al Qaeda core.
Al-Awlaki’s Path to AQAP
This review of AQAP’s formation demonstrates that Nasir al-Wahayshi is clearly the leader of AQAP. However, that does not mean that al-Awlaki plays an insignificant role in the group. He has come to be an important ideologue and spokesman — especially to English-speaking Muslims. Even in the years before he was well-known, al-Awlaki was long suspected of being an al Qaeda supporter. The 9/11 Commission Report even noted that he had had close contact with 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, who attended his mosque in San Diego. After al-Awlaki moved to a mosque in northern Virginia, Alhamzi reportedly visited him with another 9/11 hijacker, Hani Hanjour.
In 2002, under increasing law enforcement scrutiny during the 9/11 investigation, al-Awlaki left the United States. After living and preaching for just over a year in London, he returned to Yemen in early 2004. It is important to remember that in early 2004, the jihadists in Yemen were off balance and directionless. While al-Awlaki was able to establish himself as a leading online English-language jihadist preacher, he was always somewhat circumspect in his choice of language in public and did not directly espouse attacks against the United States and the West, probably because he was undergoing a slow transformation from being an American Salafi to becoming a transnational jihadist, and it takes time for ideas to crystallize. Although al-Awlaki’s prominence as an English-language preacher increased dramatically during this time, it is noteworthy that al-Awlaki was not able to provide the leadership required to organize the jihadist movement in Yemen, which would continue to struggle until al-Wahayshi escaped from prison and assumed control. Al-Awlaki is an ideologue, not an organizer.
Al-Awlaki was arrested by Yemeni authorities in August 2006 and held in custody until December 2007. Between the time of his arrest and the time of his release, there had been a tectonic shift in the Yemeni jihadist landscape under the leadership of al-Wahayshi, which had once again become active and deadly, as evidenced by the July 2010 suicide attack that killed eight Spanish tourists and their two Yemeni guides. Following his release from prison, al-Awlaki’s public rhetoric indicated an increased degree of radicalism. However, despite the increasing radicalism in his sermons and statements, al-Awlaki remained somewhat ambivalent regarding his association with AQAP. Even following the above-mentioned Dec. 24, 2009, airstrike in which he was supposedly targeted, he denied being associated with AQAP in an interview with a Yemeni reporter. This position was becoming increasingly untenable as reports of his links to Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan and Christmas Day bombing-attempt suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab were revealed.
Al-Awlaki’s Role
By early 2010, al-Awlaki finally began to publicly acknowledge his affiliation with AQAP, a relationship that he openly admitted in the first edition of AQAP’s English-language Inspire magazine. Al-Awlaki has been a regular contributor to Inspire, and a review of his contributions clearly displays his role in the organization as a religious leader and propagandist. In the first edition of Inspire, al-Awlaki wrote the theme article for the edition, “May Our Souls Be Sacrificed for You,” which provided a religious justification for attacks against the individuals involved in the Mohammed cartoon controversy. A list of individuals to be targeted was also included.
The second edition of Inspire contained a lengthy article by al-Awlaki that was intended to refute a declaration made by a group of mainstream Islamic scholars called the New Mardin Declaration, which undercut several key tenets of jihadism such as the practice of takfir, or declaring another Muslim to be an unbeliever. The scholars also condemned the practice of terrorism and attacks directed against Muslim rulers. The fourth edition of Inspire contained a fatwa by al-Awlaki entitled “The Ruling on Disposing the Unbelievers Wealth in Dar el Harb,” which provides religious justification for stealing from unbelievers in the West. Then in the fifth edition of Inspire, al-Awlaki wrote an article titled “The Tsunami of Change,” which was intended to refute claims that the ideology of jihadism had become irrelevant in the wake of the uprisings occurring across the Arab world over the previous few months.
Al-Awlaki’s in-depth refutation of the New Mardin Declaration clearly displayed how seriously jihadists take any attack against their ideology, a trend we have noted in the past by discussing the efforts of core al Qaeda ideological figures like Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Yahya al-Libi to vigorously defend the key doctrines of jihadism against assault from mainstream Islamic scholars. In the words of al-Libi, the jihadist battle “is not waged solely at the military and economic level, but is waged first and foremost at the level of doctrine.”
To a movement that is based upon ideology, especially an ideology that embraces “martyrdom,” the largest threat is not physical force — which can kill individuals — but rather ideological attacks like the New Mardin Declaration that can tear down the ideological base the movement is founded upon. This is something jihadists fear more than death.
Therefore it is important for the movement to have ideological leaders who not only expound and propagate the ideology, using it to recruit new members, but can also act as ideological watchdogs or apologists to defend the theology from ideological attack. This is one of the roles that al-Awlaki is currently playing for AQAP, that of an ideological guardian. He preaches the doctrine of jihadism in an effort to attract new recruits, provides religious rulings as to whether it is religiously permissible to attack particular targets and conduct specific types of operations and vigorously defends the doctrine of jihadism from attack.
However, it is important to understand that al-Awlaki is an ideological leader in AQAP and not the ideological leader of the organization. As noted above, the actual ideological leader (mufti) of AQAP is a Saudi named Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaish, who, unlike al-Awlaki, fought with bin Laden at Tora Bora, was captured and is a former Guantanamo Bay detainee. In addition to this cachet of having fought side by side with bin Laden and maintained his faith through Guantanamo, al-Rubaish has also been formally educated in Shariah (al-Awlaki has degrees in civil engineering and education and worked toward a degree in human resources development, but he has no formal theological training). Al-Awlaki and al-Rubaish are also joined by another AQAP ideological leader, Adel bin Abdullah al-Abab, a Yemeni imam who, according to some reports, chairs AQAP’s Shariah Council.
So, while Al-Awlaki is an American citizen, speaks native English and is an accomplished communicator (especially in appealing to English-speaking Muslims), he is not the emir of AQAP or even its primary religious authority. Therefore it is unthinkable that he could possibly replace Osama bin Laden as the leader of the worldwide jihadist movement instead of a far more significant jihadist figure such as Ayman al-Zawahiri.
The second and clearly most significant role that al-Awlaki plays for AQAP is that of the group’s foremost preacher to English-speaking Muslims. Starting in 2008, al-Wahayshi and the AQAP leadership made a strategic decision to encourage radicalized Muslims living in the West to adopt a leaderless-resistance form of jihadist militancy. This operational model meant instructing radicalized Muslims to conduct simple attacks using readily available means where they live, instead of traveling to places like Yemen or Pakistan to obtain training. This appeal was evidenced not only in the group’s online Arabic-language magazine Sada al-Malahem but also in the founding of the group’s English-language online magazine Inspire.
Because of counterterrorism measures undertaken in the West, it has become more difficult for terrorist operatives from the al Qaeda core and franchise groups like AQAP to travel to the United States or Europe to conduct terrorist attacks. This is the reason that AQAP (and later the al Qaeda core) chose to focus on recruiting and equipping grassroots operatives. These efforts have paid dividends in attacks like the Fort Hood shooting, which killed more Americans than any attack conducted by the AQAP itself. So, while al-Awlaki’s role in reaching out to the English-speaking Muslim world may not seem all that significant as far as AQAP’s internal operations are concerned, it allows the group to project power into the heart of the West, and it is a critical component of the group’s effort to take the fight to their enemy’s homeland. Al-Awlaki is important, just not in the way many in the press are portraying him to be.
-
I gather that a city has fallen to Islamist forces , , ,
-
Even Left Coasters are beginning to grumble about the Obama Administration's ideological imperative for high-speed rail that defies all common sense.
A couple of weeks ago California's Legislative Analyst's Office issued a withering report calling the state's 500-mile high-speed rail project between Anaheim and San Francisco a fiscal crackup ready to happen. (See "California's Next Train Wreck," May 18.)
The federal Department of Transportation has offered $3 billion of stimulus funds with the catch that the state has to begin construction by 2012 and build the first segment in the Central Valley. A stand-alone segment running through a sparsely populated area couldn't operate without a huge taxpayer subsidy, but a voter-approved ballot measure explicitly prohibits any such subsidies.
At the urging of the state watchdog, the rail authority asked the feds for more flexibility about where and when to start building. Last week the Department of Transportation told them to dream on. In a letter responding to the request for more flexibility, Under Secretary for Policy Roy Kienitz ordered the authority to charge full speed ahead since "once major construction is underway and approvals to complete other sections of the line have been obtained, the private sector will have compelling reasons to invest in further construction." Private sector seems to be the Obama Administration's code for government.
Even some of the state's Democrats are protesting the Administration's mulishness. Democratic state senator Alan Lowenthal told the Los Angeles Times that "there is nothing in the letter saying the federal government would commit $17 billion to $19 billion for the project . . . If it had, we would build the Central Valley segment right now. But the state needs to be financially and fiscally responsible."
Which is why the legislature needs to kill the train now. Once this boondoggle gets out of the station, the state will be writing checks for decades.
-
Although parts of California are beginning to resemble Yemen, I'm not sure this post belongs here.... :wink:
-
Lets try that again :oops:
Yemen's political crisis is taking a turn toward conflict and perhaps widespread civil war. Armed clashes between supporters of the embattled president and a rival tribal leader have spread across the country after the collapse of an agreement to end the stalemate and hold free elections. And on the weekend military helicopters attacked the southern city of Zinjibar that was seized by Islamists.
The U.S. and neighboring Arabian peninsula states have tried to coax President Ali Abdullah Saleh to resign for several months. The deal negotiated by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) was flawed but worth a try. Its demise last week makes it both harder and more urgent to stop Yemen from unraveling.
In power for 32 years, President Saleh has promised several times to step down within a month and turn power over to his vice president, with elections to follow 60 days later. But he backed out of the GCC agreement each time, most dramatically last week when he refused to sign it at a public ceremony. Mr. Saleh may be holding out for a better deal for immunity from prosecution for him and his family, having watched Hosni Mubarak and his sons land in an Egyptian prison.
Yemen is split along tribal and sectarian lines, and some of Mr. Saleh's generals have broken with him after a violent crackdown on protestors on March 15. So has the leader of the Hashid tribe, to which the president belongs. But there is no obvious successor to Mr. Saleh. If he does step aside, a fair bet would be that some combination of the military, student and other opposition leaders and Islamists would take over.
This uncertainty isn't reassuring. The best that the U.S., Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states can probably do is to help resolve the political deadlock and ensure that whatever follows Mr. Saleh doesn't see the country break up and turn into an even bigger terrorist haven. American leverage over Mr. Saleh is limited. Threats to cut $300 million in yearly U.S. aid—a fraction of the $2 billion the country gets from Saudi Arabia—or censure him at the United Nations may limit our influence and hence our ability to shape the outcome.
View Full Image
AFP/Getty Images
Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh
.The biggest winner in a Yemen civil war would be al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which formed in 2009 from the merger of Yemeni and Saudi branches. Its spiritual leader, the American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, uses the Internet to recruit supporters. The group has tried to attack the U.S. homeland twice since December 2009.
Mr. Saleh has at times worked closely with the U.S., and in 2002 a CIA Hellfire missile strike took out the previous al Qaeda leader in Yemen. But the Saleh government is also an unreliable ally, often cultivating or turning a blind eye to Islamist militancy. After antigovernment demonstrations started in the wake of the Arab Spring, Mr. Saleh redeployed as many as half the elite counterterrorism units to protect the regime.
Places like Yemen, Afghanistan and Somalia were once backwaters for American policy makers, but 9/11 changed that and probably for a long time. We have no choice except to engage closely on security with whoever takes charge in Yemen and help them tackle their al Qaeda problem.
If chaos or the Islamists prevail, the alternative would be to test the wisdom, or more likely the shortcomings, of Vice President Joe Biden's preferred "over the horizon" strategy for dealing with terrorist sanctuaries: Use missiles and special forces deployed into hostile terrain from a distance and based on limited intelligence.
-
No one wanted to fund real intelligence, intervene or be the world's policeman, so here we are, watching to see where al Qaida takes hold next. We have long known of the presence and risks in Yemen. Even the so called on the horizon plan requires an American base - on the horizon. It won't be in Mogadishu, in pirate territory or anywhere else on the Horn, so that means on the Arabian Peninsula inciting al Qaida even more. And the thousand year war goes on. We're going to need some bases. We don't even have a base right in Iraq yet. Or an exit plan in Afghan. I'm just glad that Libya was resolved in "days and not weeks".
Crafty, what do you make of it?
-
The security situation in Yemen is no doubt deteriorating, but the opposition forces still do not have the strength to dislodge pro-Saleh forces in the capital, and that’s precisely why we’re seeing a political gridlock in Yemen continue. The Saudis are meanwhile trying to prevent civil war in their southern neighbor but because all forces to this conflict are falling back on tribal law to fight their way out of the gridlock, this is a crisis that is bound to intensify in the coming days.
Over the weekend, opposition forces, particularly coming from tribesman loyal to the influential al-Ahmar family made a number of claims to the media that large-scale defections took place within Yemen’s most elite military unit, the Republican Guard. It appears that many of those claims were widely exaggerated and that Saleh still has pretty strong military control in the capital itself.
Next door, Saudi Arabia’s obviously very frustrated with the situation. They are trying to prevent civil war in the country. They’re also largely embarrassed by the failure of the GCC mediation. What’s becoming clear now in this situation is that all sides to the conflict are falling back on “urf,” or tribal code, in trying to fight their way out of the crisis. The problem is that tribal code is not as strong as it used to be for a number of reasons. As a result you have a situation where neither side fully buys into either the political negotiations or the tribal negotiations. So the opposition hasn’t bought into the political mediation led by the GCC and the Saleh family has not bought into guarantees on paper for their immunity when tribal code actually calls for their debts. And this is really the fundamental tension we see between the modern Yemeni state and its tribal tradition, which is in effect prolonging the crisis.
Meanwhile, while the vast majority of Saleh’s forces are focusing their energies on holding down the capital, the writ of the state is rapidly disintegrating in the rest of the country. For example, in the southern coastal city of Zinjibar, we’ve seen Islamist militant activity on the rise in recent days as a hodgepodge of like-minded Islamist militants have come together in trying to overrun checkpoints, attack military targets and essentially try to assert their control over the city itself. The opposition continues to claim that this is all a charade by Saleh, using the al Qaeda card to convince outsiders of the consequences, specifically the counterterrorism consequences, of forcing him out of power.
At this point in the crisis, that argument doesn’t really hold. Most of the casualties are coming from the military and rising Islamist militant activity in the country right now could be used on the other side of the argument to say that the longer Saleh stays, the greater the risk of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula expanding its sphere of influence in the country. The propaganda on all sides of this conflict are cutting into reality, and that reality is that while Saleh is struggling to maintain control of the capital, an array of rebel forces in the rest of the country are facing the opportunity of a lifetime in trying to expand their territorial control ultimately at the expense of the state.
-
U.S. Is Intensifying a Secret Campaign of Yemen Airstrikes
The Obama administration has intensified the American covert war in Yemen, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, according to American officials.
The acceleration of the American campaign in recent weeks comes amid a violent conflict in Yemen that has left the government in Sana, a United States ally, struggling to cling to power. Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to Al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to the capital, and American officials see the strikes as one of the few options to keep the militants from consolidating power.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/middleeast/09intel.html?emc=na
-
Remember when war was a bad thing? I love how bloodthirsty the left has become!
-
September 14, 2011 | 1931 GMT
Click on image below to watch video:
Analyst Reva Bhalla discusses the factors that have allowed Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh to gradually regain authority in Sanaa and the reasons for the protracted political stalemate in the country.
The Yemeni Political Crisis Stagnates
Protests and clashes between opposition and pro-government forces have continued across Yemen since Monday, when the Yemeni president signed a deal authorizing his vice president to negotiate a power transfer deal with the opposition and organize early elections. The president and his allies may not be able to assert authority over the Yemeni state overall, but his faction is making notable progress in strengthening control over the capital, Sanaa. That means Yemen will remain in protracted political stalemate and below the threshold for civil war for some time to come.
Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who remains in Saudi Arabia while his family members and allies continue to run state affairs in the Yemeni capital Sanaa, signed a deal on Monday to authorize his vice president to negotiate a power transfer deal with the opposition and organize early elections in line with the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] initiative. That initiative calls for Saleh to step down with immunity and the organization of early elections within three months of signing the deal. The deal, as expected, was full of caveats. Saleh retains the right to reject the deal in the end, and he refused to give up his post overall. If Saleh is going to leave, and he’s in apparently no rush to do so, he is going to leave on his own terms.
The opposition saw right through the deal and promptly held demonstrations on Tuesday under the slogan “no deal, no maneuvering, the president should leave.” Saleh likely anticipated the opposition’s reaction. This is yet another step along the way that allows Saleh to appear cooperative with the U.S. and other mediators while holding out just enough on opposition demands to make it appear as though the opposition is the one rejecting the deal in the end.
What’s more important to understand, and something we’ve been saying since the beginning of this crisis, is that Saleh and his clan have been maintaining control over the organs of the state that matter, namely the security apparatus. In recent days for example, the Republican Guards, led by Saleh’s son, have been making notable progress in reclaiming opposition territory in and around Sanaa. And the United States, for lack of better options, is okay with that, especially after the United States has made considerable investment in Yemen since 9/11 in an attempt to develop a so-called new guard that would keep at least some distance from the large number of Islamist sympathizers that continue to pervade Yemen’s intelligence and security agencies. The United States is maintaining pressure on Saleh and his allies to work with the opposition, but Washington is just as concerned about creating the conditions for civil war in the country that would play to the hands of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and its jihadist allies that continue operating in the country.
Meanwhile, the main arbiter in this dispute, Saudi Arabia, remains very much divided over how to manage this political crisis. Some Saudi factions have openly backed Saleh and his clan, while others have been backing the tribes and major opposition figures that are against Saleh. Some of this has to do with personal differences between Saudi King Abdullah and Saudi Interior Minister Prince Naif in their personal relationships with Saleh, but it goes to show that even Saudi Arabia has yet to form a coherent policy in managing its southern neighbor. Saudi Arabia generally prefers Yemen to remain weak and thus deeply exposed to Saudi influence. At the same time, Saudi Arabia does not want Yemen to disintegrate to the point that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, whose target set remains strategically lasered in on the Saudi kingdom, has the room to harness its skills and use Yemen as a more secure launchpad for transnational attacks. These mixed signals from Saudi Arabia are prolonging the political crisis in Yemen, but what’s clear is that Saleh and his clan maintain control over Sanaa, the capital, and the opposition does not yet have what it takes to shift that dynamic in any fundamental way.
Click for more videos
-
Second post of morning:
At White House, Weighing Limits of Terror Fight
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
Published: September 15, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s legal team is split over how much latitude the United States has to kill Islamist militants in Yemen and Somalia, a question that could define the limits of the war against Al Qaeda and its allies, according to administration and Congressional officials.
The debate, according to officials familiar with the deliberations, centers on whether the United States may take aim at only a handful of high-level leaders of militant groups who are personally linked to plots to attack the United States or whether it may also attack the thousands of low-level foot soldiers focused on parochial concerns: controlling the essentially ungoverned lands near the Gulf of Aden, which separates the countries.
The dispute over limits on the use of lethal force in the region — whether from drone strikes, cruise missiles or commando raids — has divided the State Department and the Pentagon for months, although to date it remains a merely theoretical disagreement. Current administration policy is to attack only “high-value individuals” in the region, as it has tried to do about a dozen times.
But the unresolved question is whether the administration can escalate attacks if it wants to against rank-and-file members of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, based in Yemen, and the Somalia-based Shabab. The answer could lay the groundwork for a shift in the fight against terrorists as the original Al Qaeda, operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, grows weaker. That organization has been crippled by the killing of Osama bin Laden and by a fierce campaign of drone strikes in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where the legal authority to attack militants who are battling United States forces in adjoining Afghanistan is not disputed inside the administration.
One senior official played down the disagreement on Thursday, characterizing it as a difference in policy emphasis, not legal views. Defense Department lawyers are trying to maintain maximum theoretical flexibility, while State Department lawyers are trying to reach out to European allies who think that there is no armed conflict, for legal purposes, outside of Afghanistan, and that the United States has a right to take action elsewhere only in self-defense, the official said.
But other officials insisted that the administration lawyers disagreed on the underlying legal authority of the United States to carry out such strikes.
Robert Chesney, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin who specializes in the laws of war, said the dispute reflected widespread disagreement about how to apply rules written for traditional wars to a conflict against a splintered network of terrorists — and fears that it could lead to an unending and unconstrained “global” war.
“It’s a tangled mess because the law is unsettled,” Professor Chesney said. “Do the rules vary from location to location? Does the armed conflict exist only in the current combat zone, such as Afghanistan, or does it follow wherever participants may go? Who counts as a party to the conflict? There’s a lot at stake in these debates.”
Counterterrorism officials have portrayed Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula — which was responsible for the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, 2009 — as an affiliate of Al Qaeda that may be more dangerous now than the remnants of the original group. Such officials have also expressed worry about the Shabab, though that group is generally more focused on local issues and has not been accused of attacking the United States.
In Pakistan, the United States has struck at Al Qaeda in part through “signature” strikes — those that are aimed at killing clusters of people whose identities are not known, but who are deemed likely members of a militant group based on patterns like training in terrorist camps. The dispute over targeting could affect whether that tactic might someday be used in Yemen and Somalia, too.
The Defense Department’s general counsel, Jeh C. Johnson, has argued that the United States could significantly widen its targeting, officials said. His view, they explained, is that if a group has aligned itself with Al Qaeda against Americans, the United States can take aim at any of its combatants, especially in a country that is unable or unwilling to suppress them.
==================
Page 2 of 2)
The State Department’s top lawyer, Harold H. Koh, (MARC: I have commented on him various times) has agreed that the armed conflict with Al Qaeda is not limited to the battlefield theater of Afghanistan and adjoining parts of Pakistan. But, officials say, he has also contended that international law imposes additional constraints on the use of force elsewhere. To kill people elsewhere, he has said, the United States must be able to justify the act as necessary for its self-defense — meaning it should focus only on individuals plotting to attack the United States.
The fate of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, hangs heavily over the targeting debate, officials said. In several habeas corpus lawsuits, judges have approved the detention of Qaeda suspects who were captured far from the Afghan battlefield, as well as detainees who were deemed members of a force that was merely “associated” with Al Qaeda. One part of the dispute is the extent to which rulings about detention are relevant to the targeting law.
Congress, too, may influence the outcome of the debate. It is considering, as part of a pending defense bill, a new authorization to use military force against Al Qaeda and its associates. A version of the provision proposed by the House Armed Forces Committee would establish an expansive standard for the categories of groups that the United States may single out for military action, potentially making it easier for the United States to kill large numbers of low-level militants in places like Somalia.
In an interview, Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said that he supported the House version and that he would go further. He said he would offer an amendment that would explicitly authorize the use of force against a list of specific groups including the Shabab, as well as set up a mechanism to add further groups to the list if they take certain “overt acts.”
“This is a worldwide conflict without borders,” Mr. Graham argued. “Restricting the definition of the battlefield and restricting the definition of the enemy allows the enemy to regenerate and doesn’t deter people who are on the fence.”
-
“This is a worldwide conflict without borders,” Mr. Graham argued. “Restricting the definition of the battlefield and restricting the definition of the enemy allows the enemy to regenerate and doesn’t deter people who are on the fence.”
Exactly.
-
U.S.-Born al Qaeda Leader Anwar al-Awlaki Is Killed in Yemen
SANA, Yemen — Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born preacher depicted as a leading figure in Al Qaeda’s outpost in Yemen, was killed on Friday morning in the north of the country, according to the Defense Ministry.
Earlier this year, the American military renewed its campaign of airstrikes in Yemen, using drone aircraft and fighter jets to attack Qaeda militants. One of the attacks was aimed at Mr. Awlaki, one of the most prominent members of the Qaeda affiliate group. There was no immediate comment from American officials.
But Mr. Awlaki’s death, if confirmed, seemed likely to be welcomed in the United States, where Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said in July that two of his top goals were to remove Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s new leader after the death of Osama Bin Laden, and Mr. Awlaki.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/world/middleeast/anwar-al-awlaki-is-killed-in-yemen.html?emc=na
-
They told me that if I voted for McCain, we'd be using Hellfire missiles to kill American citizens without due process. They were right!
-
Summary
The Yemeni Defense Ministry has announced that U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in an airstrike. If the reports are true, al-Awlaki’s death would be a blow to al Qaeda’s Yemeni franchise, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). But it is important not to overstate the cleric’s death; AQAP’s ideological and physical battle against the West will continue whether he is dead or not.
Analysis
Related Links
Al Qaeda’s Leadership in Yemen
The Yemeni Defense Ministry on Sept. 30 announced that an airstrike directed against a motorcade near the town of Khashef in Yemen’s al-Jawf province killed U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. AFP and Al Arabiya have reported that tribal sources in Yemen have confirmed al-Awlaki’s death. U.S. counterterrorism sources have also confirmed the death to STRATFOR.
Al-Awlaki served as an ideologue and spokesman for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al Qaeda’s franchise in Yemen. However, when considering the implications of al-Awlaki’s death, it is important not to overstate his role in AQAP. He was not the group’s leader, as some in the media have claimed, and although he was a member of its Shariah Council, he was not even the group’s primary religious leader. If the reports are true — rumors of his death have surfaced in the past — his death would severely damage the al Qaeda node’s ability to inspire militants in the English-speaking world to action. AQAP’s outreach to those militants will not stop completely, nor will its attempts to attack the West on the physical battlefield.
AQAP leader Nasir al-Wahayshi has placed a great deal of emphasis on strategic communications as a form of jihad, which has been reflected by the amount of resources the group has devoted to its Arabic-language magazine Sada al-Malahim and the English-language Inspire magazine. Al-Wahayshi also has taken the lead in advocating that Muslims embrace a leaderless resistance model for their militant operations. Having been born, raised and educated in the United States, al-Awlaki has served as AQAP’s primary spokesman to Muslims in the English-speaking world, and his efforts have inspired a number of attacks and attempted attacks. Al-Awlaki has been linked to Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Hasan, would-be Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and two of the 9/11 hijackers. More recently, al-Awlaki and AQAP appear to have inspired U.S. Army Pfc. Naser Jason Abdo, the man arrested July 27 and charged with planning an attack on Ft. Hood.
(click here to enlarge image)
When considering these reports of al-Awlaki’s death, it is also important to remember that he has been declared dead before. The first time followed a December 2009 airstrike in Shabwa province, and the second came after a May 5 unmanned aerial vehicle strike in Nissab, Shabwa province. Shabwa is near al-Jawf, where al-Awlaki was reportedly killed. If he is indeed dead, we can anticipate a statement or eulogy from AQAP in the near future.
Al-Awlaki’s death would deprive AQAP of an important asset in the group’s outreach to the English-speaking world and its efforts to inspire grassroots operatives there, which is the primary threat he posed to the United States and the West. It also would impact AQAP operations on the ideological battlefield. The group’s outreach to the English-speaking world will continue through Inspire magazine and its editor, Samir Khan, but Khan simply does not have the prominence of al-Awlaki.
There is already an indication that Khan is operating under some constraint. On Sept. 27, AQAP published the seventh edition of Inspire magazine. That issue, dedicated to the 9/11 attacks, mostly was composed of photos with very little written content. It did not contain the normal “Open Source Jihad” section, which is intended to equip grassroots jihadists to conduct attacks in the West. The fact that the edition was so lacking in written content and that it was published 16 days after the 9/11 anniversary is an indication that Khan may be under some pressure and does not have the same freedom to operate as he has in the past.
But AQAP does not just operate on the ideological battlefield. On the physical battlefield, the increased pace of U.S. airstrikes in Yemen likely will serve to keep AQAP’s leadership focused on survival, and the group’s fighting on the ground in Yemen also will consume most of its physical resources. AQAP fighters are likely too busy to contemplate and launch attacks against the West like the December 2009 underwear bomb or the November 2010 cargo bomb attempt. However, al-Wahayshi, his tactical commanders and AQAP’s innovative bombmaker Hassan Tali al-Asiri would certainly like to target the West, and if given the latitude, they will continue to plot attacks against targets in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and beyond, regardless of whether al-Awlaki is dead or not.
-
By Scott Stewart
U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an ideologue and spokesman for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al Qaeda’s franchise in Yemen, was killed in a Sept. 30 airstrike directed against a motorcade near the town of Khashef in Yemen’s al-Jawf province. The strike, which occurred at 9:55 a.m. local time, reportedly was conducted by a U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and may have also involved fixed-wing naval aircraft. Three other men were killed in the strike, one of whom was Samir Khan, the creator and editor of AQAP’s English-language magazine Inspire.
Al-Awlaki has been targeted before; in fact, he had been declared dead on at least two occasions. The first time followed a December 2009 airstrike in Shabwa province, and the second followed a May 5 airstrike, also in Shabwa. In light of confirmation from the U.S. and Yemeni governments and from statements made by al-Awlaki’s family members, it appears that he is indeed dead this time. We anticipate that AQAP soon will issue an official statement confirming the deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan.
As STRATFOR noted Sept. 30, the deaths of both al-Awlaki and Khan can be expected to greatly hamper AQAP’s efforts to radicalize and equip English-speaking Muslims. The group may have other native English speakers, but individuals who possess the charisma and background of al-Awlaki or the graphics and editorial skills of Khan are difficult to come by in Yemen. The al Qaeda franchise’s English-language outreach is certain to face a significant setback.
This deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan and the impact their deaths will have on AQAP’s outreach efforts provide an opportunity to consider the importance of individuals — and their personal skill sets — to militant organizations, especially organizations seeking to conduct transnational media and ideological operations.
Bridging the Gap Between Militant Ideology and Operations
When considering militant groups with transnational objectives and reach such as AQAP, we need to recognize that there are several components necessary for such groups to conduct successful operations, including finances, logistics, planning, training and intelligence. But at a higher level, there is also the distinction between those elements of the group that are dedicated to operations on the physical battlefield and those who are focused on operations on the ideological battlefield. While physical operations are important for obvious reasons, the ideological component is also critically important because it allows a group to recruit new members, maintain the ideological commitment of those already in the group and help shape public perception through propaganda. Because of this, the ideological component is especially important for the long-term viability and continuity of a group or movement.
Groups such as the al Qaeda core and AQAP appreciate the importance of the ideological struggle. Published three days before the airstrike against Khan and al-Awlaki, the seventh edition of Inspire contains an article written by Khan titled “The Media Conflict,” wherein he quotes AQAP leader Nasir al-Wahayshi (aka Abu Basir) as stating, “media work is half of the jihad.”
The role of the media in propagating militant ideology has been revolutionized by the Internet, which allows small groups in remote corners of the globe to produce and broadcast material that is almost instantly available to people all around the world. Indeed, jihadists have succeeded in radicalizing and recruiting people from disparate countries. Products such as Inspire or the video and audio recordings of militant leaders such as al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri are a giant leap forward from the way militants communicated 25 years ago, when groups like November 17 would send communiques to the newspapers and Hezbollah would release videos via major television networks of Western hostages they had kidnapped.
Interestingly, militant groups quickly recognized the significance of this media democratization and were early adopters of the Internet. By the mid-1990s, white supremacists in the United States had established Stormfront.com, and in 1996, jihadists inaugurated azzam.com, a professional-looking website that allowed them to provide inspiration, news and instruction to adherents to their ideology and to potential recruits. Azzam.com eventually became an important mechanism through which funds for jihadist groups could be raised and willing volunteers could find ways to link up with jihadist groups in places like Afghanistan, Chechnya and Bosnia.
Thus, the Internet began to serve as a bridge that connected the ideological battlefield with the physical battlefield. When we look back at AQAP’s media activities, we can see that they, too, were intended to bridge this gap. For example, the group’s Arabic language magazine Sada al-Malahim (meaning “Echo of Battle”) regularly contained not only articles intended to propagate and defend the jihadist ideology but also articles designed to give practical and tactical guidance. And when al-Wahayshi in October 2009 began advocating that jihadists in the West practice a leaderless-resistance style of operations rather than traveling to places like Yemen or Pakistan for training, they promoted that tactical shift via Sada al-Malahim.
Khan’s and Al-Awlaki’s Significance for Inspire
In July 2010, AQAP launched the first edition of Inspire magazine. Khan, a longtime publisher of jihadist material, was chosen to spearhead the Inspire project for AQAP. (Khan was born in Saudi Arabia to Pakistani parents but raised in the United States.) Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Khan began to publish an English-language pro-jihadist blog and eventually established jihadist websites and an Internet magazine called Jihad Recollections. It was the artistic similarities between Jihad Recollections and Inspire that helped identify Khan as the editor of Inspire. Khan left his parents’ home in Charlotte, N.C., in 2009 to move to Yemen after he learned the FBI was investigating him for his connections to jihadist groups.
Inspire was established intentionally to help further al-Wahayshi’s vision of jihadists adopting the leaderless resistance model. Its stated purpose was to radicalize and recruit young, English-speaking Muslims and then inspire and equip them to conduct attacks in the West.
Khan was only 16 years old when he began his jihadist propaganda activities in 2002, and he essentially grew up on the ideological battlefield. By the time he immigrated to Yemen in 2009, he was an experienced cyber-jihadist. In addition to his advanced computer security skills, Khan also energized the Inspire magazine project, and his youth, colloquial American English competency, graphic design flair and knowledge of American pop culture gave Inspire magazine an edgy quality that appealed to young, English-speaking Muslims.
Notably, Khan did not produce most of the written content for Inspire. In fact, he relied heavily on the speeches of al Qaeda figures such as al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden, the books of Abu Musab al-Suri and interviews with AQAP figures such as al-Wahayshi and al-Awlaki. However, it was the way in which Khan packaged these materials that made them so appealing. Certainly, there may have been others working with Khan to produce Inspire, and other people undoubtedly can continue to translate portions of al Qaeda speeches or interview AQAP leaders, but Khan was the driving creative force behind the project. His death thus likely will have a substantial impact on the content and feel of Inspire — if the magazine continues at all.
AQAP’s Arabic-language propaganda efforts suffered a blow in December 2010 when Nayf bin Mohammed al-Qahtani, the founder and editor of Sada al-Malahim and the founder of Malahim media, was killed in a battle with Yemeni security forces. Sada al-Malahim had been publishing an edition roughly every two months since its inception in January 2008. However, since the release of its 16th edition in February 2011, possibly an edition al-Qahtani had worked on, the promised 17th edition has yet to be published. It is possible Inspire will meet the same fate.
However, Khan was not the only American-born jihadist living in Yemen who possessed unique talents that were useful to AQAP’s outreach efforts to English-speaking Muslims. Al-Awlaki had been the imam of congregations in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Va., but left the United States in 2002 after being investigated for his ties to two of the 9/11 hijackers and links to a number of other jihadist figures and plots. Al-Awlaki initially moved to the United Kingdom, where he continued to preach, but as authorities began to clamp down on radical preachers in what has been termed “Londonistan,” al-Awlaki moved to Yemen, his ancestral homeland, in 2004.
During his years in the United States and the United Kingdom, al-Awlaki had become a high-profile imam known for his intellect, charisma and ability to appeal to young, English-speaking Muslims. His sermons became very popular, and audio recordings of those sermons were widely distributed on the Internet via his personal website as well as several other Islamic websites. (Thousands of these videos have been posted to YouTube and have received tens of thousands of hits.) Despite his being under investigation by the U.S. government, in 2002 al Awlaki was asked to lead a prayer service at the U.S. Capitol and to speak at the Pentagon on the topic of radical Islam. These engagements reflected al-Awlaki’s popularity and added to the mystique that surrounded him. He was seen as a bit of a celebrity in the English-speaking Muslim world, and his presence in Yemen undoubtedly played a big factor in al-Wahayshi’s decision to expand AQAP’s outreach to al-Awlaki’s audience.
Through his work on the ideological battlefield, Al-Awlaki was able to draw men to the physical battlefield. These men could be sent on on suicide missions, such as would-be Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, or encouraged to conduct simple attacks where they live, as in the case of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan.
It is important to remember that al-Awlaki was not AQAP’s primary theological authority. The group’s mufti, Suleiman al-Rubaish, a Saudi cleric with a degree in Islamic law, fought with al-Wahayshi and bin Laden at Tora Bora in 2001 before being captured and spending five years in captivity at Guantanamo Bay. After being returned to Saudi Arabia in 2006, al-Rubaish completed the Saudi rehabilitation program and then promptly fled the country to Yemen after his release. Moreover, AQAP’s Shariah Council, of which al-Awlaki was a member, is chaired by a Yemeni cleric named Adel bin Abdullah al-Abab.
Al-Rubaish maintains serious credibility among jihadists because of his friendship with bin Laden, his survival at Tora Bora and his time served in Guantanamo, and al-Abab is a respected Yemeni cleric. However, neither of the men possesses the native-English language ability of al-Awlaki. They also lack the ability to culturally relate to and motivate Muslims in the West in the same way that al-Awlaki did — and continues to do, via his messages that live on in cyberspace. Because of this, al-Awlaki will not be easily replaced.
AQAP’s Operational Ability Intact
This brings us to the ideas of leadership and succession in militant groups. Some have argued that arresting or killing key members of militant networks does not impact such groups, but experience seems to indicate that in many cases the removal of key personnel does indeed make a difference, especially in the near term and if pressure is maintained on the organization. This dynamic has been reflected by the ongoing post-9/11 campaign against the al Qaeda core and their inability to conduct their oft threatened, and purportedly more deadly, follow-on attacks to 9/11. It has also been demonstrated by the operations mounted against regional jihadist franchise groups in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. The removal of key personnel such as Saudi leader Abdel Aziz al-Muqrin and Indonesian jihadists Hambali and Noordin Top have had substantial impacts on those regional franchises.
Of course, while AQAP’s English-speaking outreach will be severely crippled following Khan’s and al-Awlaki’s deaths, the core of its physical battlefield operational leadership remains intact. Al-Wahayshi is a competent and savvy leader. His military commander, Qasim al-Raymi, is an aggressive, ruthless and fierce fighter, and his principal bomb maker, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri is creative and imaginative in designing his innovative explosive devices. There were rumors circulating that al-Asiri had been killed in the airstrike directed against al-Awlaki, but they proved to be unfounded. If al-Asiri had been killed, the airstrike would have impacted both the ideological and operational abilities of the group.
The recent increase of U.S. airstrikes, including the one that killed al-Awlaki and Khan, will serve to keep AQAP’s leaders focused on survival, as will the conventional warfare in which the group is currently engaging as it fights for control over areas of Yemen. However, the AQAP leadership undoubtedly still desires to attack the United States and the West — perhaps even more so now to avenge their fallen comrades. If they are given the time and space to plot and plan, the AQAP leadership will continue their efforts to attack the United States. They certainly retain the capability to do so, despite the loss of two ideological leaders.
-
Summary
The An-26 military transport plane that crashed upon landing Oct. 24 in Lahj province, Yemen, killed eight Syrian military personnel and one Yemeni passenger and wounded seven others, including two more Syrians. In the days since the crash, opposition figures have been asking why the regime of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is commissioning Syrian pilots (assuming that those killed in the crash were indeed pilots) to combat opposition forces. The political pressures facing the Syrian regime, not those facing Yemen’s, may be more to blame.
Analysis
Questions are still lingering over the mysterious Oct. 24 crash of a military plane in Yemen that reportedly resulted in the deaths of eight Syrian military personnel and one Yemeni passenger. The An-26 transport plane crashed upon landing at the al Anad air force base in Lahj province, southeast of Sanaa. The cause of the crash remains unclear; Yemeni opposition forces claim it was a Yemeni martyrdom operation by the Yemeni pilot to prevent attacks on opposition forces, but a more reasonable explanation, maintained by the military, is that the crash was due to human and mechanical error. Seven people — two Syrians and five Yemenis — reportedly survived the crash.
The obvious question that Yemeni opposition figures have been positing in the days since the crash is why the regime of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is commissioning Syrian airmen to allegedly combat opposition forces. The answer may have more to do with the political pressures currently being faced by the Syrian regime than with Yemen’s own political crisis.
Since the crash, Yemeni opposition figures belonging to the Joint Meeting Parties (JMP) seized the opportunity to criticize the government for allegedly not having enough trained pilots of its own, thereby having to commission Syrian and even Iraqi pilots to conduct attacks on opposition forces. Anonymous military sources in Yemen responded to those allegations in interviews with state-run media in which they claimed that the Syrian airmen had been working as flight trainers at the Faculty of Aviation and Air Defense since August 1999, when a defense cooperation agreement was signed between Syria and Yemen.
It is not surprising to find foreign pilots, particularly Iraqis and Syrians, among Yemen’s air force. Following the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Yemen quietly invited a number of former Iraqi Baathist pilots into its air force to help operate the country’s Soviet-era MiG-29 and Sukhoi jet fighters. Several Iraqi fighter pilots were involved in Yemen’s air offensive on al-Houthi rebel positions in northern Yemen in the fall of 2009.
Syrian pilots have been known to operate in Yemen for some time, but STRATFOR sources have indicated that their presence has expanded recently. It is important to remember that Syria’s air force is dominated by Sunni pilots, though Syrian air force intelligence and command and control systems for the air forces are handled almost exclusively by minority Alawites, who are aligned with the regime. When Syria began experiencing more significant demonstrations in the spring, there were unconfirmed rumors that the regime had grounded part of its air force out of concern that Sunni pilots might defect. A STRATFOR source more recently claimed that as part of Syrian President Bashar al Assad’s strategy to prevent Sunni dissent among air force pilots, Syria struck a deal with Saleh to send more Sunni pilots to assist Yemen’s air force. Al Assad’s calculation may have been that the farther away from Syria these pilots were, the less trouble they could cause at home.
At the same time, Yemen’s air force was in need of extra assistance to target al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) as well as opposition forces. A STRATFOR source claims that about 60 Syrian pilots are in Yemen and are concentrated in southern Abyan province, where AQAP is more active. While trying to shield itself from potential Sunni military defections at home, the Syrian regime also has tried to use its quiet assistance to the Yemeni regime against AQAP as a way to curry favor with the United States. Syria has attempted similar gestures in the past, sporadically offering intelligence cooperation on militant activity in Iraq as a way of seeking relief from Washington when the need arises.
The crash that exposed the Syrian military presence in Yemen to the public thus offers a peek into Syria’s own handling of its domestic political crisis. There are no signs thus far of serious breaks within the Alawite-dominated military ranks in Syria that would indicate a coup or collapse of the regime is imminent, but the al Assad clan has had to keep a close eye on its air force for good reason. The last thing it wants is for Sunni pilots to defect and flee with major military hardware to a country like Turkey, which has been offering a great deal of vocal support to the opposition but has thus far refrained from following through with plans to establish a military buffer zone along the border with Syria.
Hoping to avoid a situation similar to Libya’s, where rebel fighters were able to use the eastern base of Benghazi as a refuge, the Syrian regime is relying on the heavy Alawite presence in the military overall to keep potential Sunni defectors in check. Sending off a few pilots to Yemen could well be part of this protection strategy as the al Assad regime attempts to ward off further dissent.
Read more: Why Syrian Pilots Are Operating in Yemen | STRATFOR
-
Summary
Within the past two months, Yemen’s Zaidi al-Houthi rebels have expanded their area of control from their traditional stronghold in the northern province of Saada to the neighboring al-Jawf province. More significantly, reports have indicated that the al-Houthis have managed to gain control of several towns and villages in Hajja province, which means they have moved toward the Red Sea. They will face challenges as they expand their territory, but Sanaa’s distractions might allow them to gain access to the coast, which could facilitate better access to foreign weapons suppliers and would push Saudi Arabia to respond.
Analysis
Yemen’s Zaidi al-Houthi rebels recently have been able to expand their control across Yemen’s northern provinces. This expansion comes as Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s forces are concentrating on stifling anti-regime protesters and battling defected Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar’s forces in Sanaa province and central Yemen — all while dedicating resources to the southern provinces, where battles with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and tribal militias continue.
The next goal for the al-Houthi expansion appears to be Midi, a small town with access to the Red Sea. Midi is strategically valuable for gaining access to arms and resources, as the al-Houthis’ indigenous resources and the general availability of arms in Yemen have been insufficient for the al-Houthis to gain the autonomy they had before Saleh came to power. Midi’s importance was evident in November 2009, when Saudi Arabia’s navy blockaded northern Yemen’s Red Sea coast for fear that the al-Houthis were being supplied through Midi and Salif.
(click here to enlarge image)
STRATFOR sources have said that the al-Houthis have gained tactical control of territory in Yemen’s Saada and al-Jawf provinces, both of which border Saudi Arabia. This is an important development because Saudi Arabia could feel forced to respond militarily if the rebels threaten its provinces of Jizan and Najran again. Sources have also said the al-Houthis are moving toward Midi. Reports in The Yemen Observer have cited residents of Hajja province as saying the al-Houthis are seizing towns and villages in the province, including the mountainous Kuhlan al Sharaf district, to secure an open route to the Red Sea port.
Before unrest ensued elsewhere in the country at the beginning of the year, the rebels’ expansion into the northern provinces was much more difficult, as the Yemeni regime was able to maintain pressure on the al-Houthis and provide financing and resources to various tribes and militant groups to keep the al-Houthis in check. For example, in Hajja province, Saleh’s regime supported such tribal groups as the Kushar and Aahim, according to The Yemen Observer. But now that the regime’s focus and resources have shifted to central and southern Yemen, the tribes that once resisted the al-Houthi expansion are much weaker. In al-Jawf province, the Yemeni and Saudi regimes gave various tribal forces resources to attack the al-Houthis. However, it is clear that such efforts have been less effective of late; since the al-Houthis have been able to exploit Sanaa and, given Riyadh’s distractions with unrest at home and elsewhere in Bahrain, expand their area of influence.
The Strategic Significance of Red Sea Ports
The acquisition and control of Midi has been one of the al-Houthis’ main strategic goals. The port does not hold great economic significance for Yemen; it is very small, and it is unclear if it can accommodate large container ships. However, the port has been the rebels’ main access point to small arms, funding and possibly foreign advisers. In 2009, Midi — along with the port in Salif — was thought to facilitate the smuggling of weapons and materials to the rebels. Midi in particular is known as an entry point for illegal immigrants being smuggled into Yemen. In November 2009, Yemeni authorities arrested 30 illegal Somali migrants believed to have been smuggled through the port city; these immigrants allegedly were deployed to take up armed with the al-Houthis. Some could have been on their way elsewhere, as Yemen has served as an intermediary destination for African migrants on their way to jobs in Saudi Arabia.
If the al-Houthis could gain full control of Midi or Salif, it would be easier for them to acquire weapons and resources to secure and defend the provinces where they have established influence. It could also give them control of some amount of trade, which would give them tax revenue to support their attempts at autonomy. But Riyadh fears that any success by the al-Houthis in Yemen would inspire the group’s fellow Zaidis across the border; if the al-Houthis can secure a path to these ports, the Saudis likely would intervene.
In fact, Saudi Arabia intervened on a previous occasion in 2009 during an incident known as the al-Houthi rebellion. The Saudi response, dubbed “Operation Scorched Earth,” began after the al-Houthis gained control of areas Riyadh considered dangerously close to the border with the Saudi provinces of Najran and Jizan. The operation entailed a small naval blockade with an emphasis on aerial bombardments and artillery fire targeting rebel positions to prevent the al-Houthis from gaining access to the Red Sea.
Struggle for Power in the Persian Gulf
The Saudis fear that Iran is supporting the al-Houthis in a proxy battle between the Arab and Persian powers, who are continuing their geopolitical competition over the Middle East. Unconfirmed reports from STRATFOR sources indicate that during the 2009 al-Houthi rebellion, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) trained the al-Houthis in producing improvised explosive devices and even sent supplies along a route via Eritrea’s Assab Harbor. According to the sources, IRGC officers bought and transported weapons in Somalia and Eritrea and shipped them to Yemen’s Salif port, where the supplies then passed through Hajja and Huth in northern Yemen before reaching Saada. The IRGC also reportedly used a more traditional route from Assab Harbor along the heel of the Arabian Peninsula in the Gulf of Aden, then to Shaqra in southern Yemen and on to Marib, then Baraqish and finally to the mountains in Saada.
The al-Houthi expansion is occurring as Saudi Arabia views the United States as struggling to form a coherent containment strategy against Iran, especially as the deadline looms for U.S. forces to withdraw from neighboring Iraq. In addition, Saudi Arabia has been trying to clamp down on Shiite unrest in Bahrain while attempting to keep Iranian clandestine activity on the eastern side of the Arabian Peninsula at bay. Saudi Arabia has a similar interest in keeping potential Iranian influence in Yemen away from the southern Saudi border. Although the Iranians would like to get involved in such conflicts, their involvement with the al-Houthis would be limited, due to sectarian disagreements and the difficulty of accessing al-Houthi territory.
Indeed, the al-Houthis likewise face geographic challenges as they attempt to gain control along the coast. If successful, they would be more vulnerable to conventional fighting — air strikes and artillery — and would not have the advantages of guerrilla tactics that they have in the mountains at present. These challenges will be particularly difficult as the rebels move through Hajja, a majority Sunni Arab province where they likely will face resistance before they can control either port.
Meanwhile, Saleh’s forces will be operating under heavy constraints, as they remain focused on quashing other unrest and fighting AQAP. With Saleh’s regime preoccupied, if the al-Houthis continue expanding to the southwest and securing a path to Midi, it will become increasingly likely that the Saudis will move to crush the possibility of a strengthening al-Houthi force that could threaten Saudi stability.
-
Director of Strategic Intelligence Reva Bhalla examines Yemen’s GCC power transfer deal and how the country’s political crisis will play out in the coming year.
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT
Related Links
• Yemen’s President Transfers Power
Whereas six months ago Yemen seemed to be facing the threat of civil war, the country is now returning to its usual state of contained chaos with Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s faction ready to reassert its authority after a relatively brief and bloody political struggle.
When Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh traveled to Riyadh to sign a Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) deal that would transfer his powers to his vice president and allow for early presidential elections, he did so from a position of strength. Something STRATFOR emphasized throughout Yemen’s political crisis was that even though it looked like the regime was on the ropes, regime collapse was still very unlikely given the fact that Saleh’s family members and allies retained control over the key security, political and economic organs of the state.
Even though Saleh will be formally stepping down as president and elections will likely be held Feb. 21 as planned, the political transition in Yemen in no way constitutes true regime change. Saudi Arabia — which drove the negotiation over the GCC deal and likely lined a lot of pockets with money to make that deal happen — in the end, granted Saleh a dignified exit. But Saleh would not have agreed to the deal without assurances that the regime would largely remain under his family’s control.
And as we expected, Saleh did succeed in coercing the main armed opposition led by First Armored Brigade commander Gen. Ali Mohsen to the negotiating table. Mohsen selected half of the members of a newly formed military council led by the vice president, and on Sunday he formally gave his blessing to the GCC deal. Ali Mohsen will likely be given a senior defense post in the new government and will retain influence among the heavily Islamist-concentrated Old Guard in the Yemeni security and intelligence apparatus. But Saleh’s son, Ahmed Ali Saleh, will remain in control over the armed forces overall.
The political opposition, embodied by the Joint Meeting Parties coalition, has also signed on to the deal and is readying itself to compete in the upcoming election.
The youth opposition were completely sidelined from the GCC deal. They are the ones that are out on the streets protesting out of desperation, but there really isn’t much this faction can do alone to stop it. They’re a minor player and they don’t have much power.
So Yemen has essentially four leaders at the moment: President Saleh, who will remain the president of the ruling General People’s Congress party; Ahmed Ali Saleh, the president’s son and head of the Republican Guard and Special Forces; Vice President Hadi and lastly, Ali Mohsen.
Vice President Hadi is pretty much guaranteed to be elected president in February. This will be important for the maintenance of the peace agreement between Saleh and the political opposition, as all generally regard Hadi as a pretty honest broker and mediator.
All indicators so far point to Yemen’s political crisis settling out in the new year, but Yemen’s internal problems are still far from over. The country is still staggering economically and is extremely dependent on Saudi Arabia for its economic survival. Saudi Arabia has already pledged to finance whatever Yemen needs to hold itself together so as to avoid a bigger crisis on the Arabian Peninsula.
At the same time, a number of militant factions have benefited from Yemen’s political distractions and will continue to challenge Sanaa’s authority. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has been strengthening its foothold in the south and elsewhere, while in the north al-Houthi rebels are being locked in a battle with Salafists in trying to consolidate their recent territorial gains.
Saudi maneuvering and financing through tribes can be seen on multiple sides of these conflicts — creating a complicated situation overall — but the overall aim of Riyadh in the coming year will be to ensure that instability in Yemen doesn’t spill over its borders in the Arabian Peninsula when Saudi Arabia has much bigger issues like Iran to worry about.
-
Yemen will hold its presidential election Tuesday, and President Ali Abdullah Saleh will formally give up his presidential title. Saleh will likely be referenced in most media as the fourth Arab leader to be stripped of power by the "Arab Spring," but the reality of this political transition is much more complex.
Yemen is experiencing anything but regime change. Saleh may be sacrificing the presidency for now, but his son and nephews dominate the military and security apparatus and other relatives remain firmly in the country's top political and business posts. Even Saleh himself is not stepping out of the political picture; after the election, he will head the ruling General People's Congress party, which dominates the country's parliament. Whether he will attempt a return to the presidency down the line remains anyone's guess. For now, Saleh's deputy (and the sole contender for the presidency), Vice President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, will take his place. Hadi has been something of a mediator between Saleh and the opposition, but he does not have a political base of his own to resist and overrule either side of the power struggle.
Opponents of Saleh's family are not prepared to resign themselves to the idea of superficial regime change. Leading the charge against Saleh's clan are Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen, head of the First Armored Division; Hamid al-Ahmar, a leader of the large opposition Islah party and a renowned Yemeni business tycoon and Sheikh Sadeq al-Ahmar, Hamid's brother and chief of Yemen's largest and Saleh's own Hashid tribal confederation.
Through its combined military, tribal, political and economic power, this opposition alliance has put up a tough resistance against the Saleh faction over the past year. Mohsen and the al-Ahmar brothers brought thousands onto the streets to protest the regime, encouraged a sizable number of Yemeni soldiers to defect and turn on the regime's forces, and are strongly suspected of orchestrating an assassination attempt against Saleh last June. More recently, they helped fuel a mutiny against Saleh's half brother, air force commander Maj. Gen. Mohammed Saleh.
But these efforts have not been enough. Saleh's staying power lies in a fear of the alternative. The United States and Saudi Arabia have a broad, mutual understanding that trying to dismantle the regime would create more problems than it is worth. The United States has been especially unnerved at the thought of Mohsen -- a popular figure among Yemen's Islamist old guard in the military and intelligence establishment -- revising Yemen's counterterrorism cooperation with the United States, thereby potentially unraveling more than a decade's worth of U.S. investment into training a more U.S.-friendly "new guard" led by Saleh's son and nephews. Simply put, neither the United States nor Saudi Arabia wants to trigger the collapse of an economically fragile state that is home to many jihadists and that is separated from the oil-rich Saudi kingdom by only a border.
Therefore, the United States has a need to exaggerate the successes of Yemen's political transition. U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan on Sunday personally delivered a letter on behalf of U.S. President Barack Obama to Hadi that said Yemen was "a model for how a peaceful transition in the Middle East can occur." It is questionable whether the past several months in Yemen can be accurately described as a "peaceful transition." Moreover, the fight between the Saleh clan and its opposition will not be settled through the ballot box and will surely drag on for some time. The opposition will continue to try to oust more of Saleh's family members from the regime, and Saleh's faction will continue to try to entrench itself even more deeply, including through a rumored restructuring of the armed forces.
The fight in Yemen is not over, but the United States has every reason to hope and pretend that it is. At the same time, the United States is following a strategic imperative in trying to prolong a crisis for Syrian President Bashar al Assad as a lever to weaken Iran. And in Egypt, the United States seems to be struggling between the ideological (and public) imperative of encouraging a free and fair democratic transition and its underlying strategic imperative of backing a military regime that will maintain order, limit the political authority of the Islamists and protect Egypt's peace treaty with Israel. The "Arab Spring" narrative has frequently blurred the ideological and strategic objectives of the United States. In the case of Yemen, things are more transparent.
-
Al Qaeda Responds to the Yemeni Offensive
May 21, 2012 | 1531 GMT
Print 0 0ShareThis2Email2
Text Size
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary
-/AFP/GettyImages
Yemeni soldiers fire at al Qaeda militants in Lawder, Abyan province, April 30
A suicide bomber reportedly detonated a belt of explosives in Sanaa's al-Sabin Square the morning of May 21, killing at least 96 soldiers and wounding 300. The attack came during a rehearsal for a National Unity Day military parade set for May 22, and the explosives were detonated before the Yemeni defense minister and chief of staff were to greet the troops. Whether the bomber was a Yemeni soldier remains unclear. Yemeni officials indicated that the individual was dressed in an army uniform, and it would be difficult for an outsider to enter into a squad or platoon formation.
The high casualty rate of the May 21 attack is more unusual than the tactic it employed. If indeed the suicide bombing killed 96 people, it would be one of the most effective AQAP suicide bombings in Yemen in recent years.
Analysis
A video from a Yemeni TV station shows roughly 50 to 70 soldiers lying on the ground at the scene of the explosion. How many of those were dead and how many were just wounded could not be determined. The majority of those injured belonged to the Central Security Organization, a paramilitary force commanded by Yahya Saleh, a nephew of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The organization has its own detention facilities and is part of the Yemeni Ministry of Interior. According to BBC Arabic, al Qaeda sent it a statement saying that the attack represented retaliation for crimes by the Central Security Organization.
Suicide bombings are not the main tactic that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the regional al Qaeda franchise, has used in Yemen lately. Instead, it has relied on motorcycle shootings, improvised explosive devices, vehicle borne improvised explosive devices, ambushes with automatic weapons or pursuing a target to their home and then shooting them. The group carried out its last suicide bombing April 6. The suicide bomber's device exploded before he reached his target, believed to be an intelligence office in Mansoura, and killed two people. This attack is also the first pedestrian suicide bombing since the attempted attack on British Ambassador to Yemen Tim Torlot in April 2010.
A belt or vest typically carries around 10 to 25 pounds of explosives. The explosives and the accompanying shrapnel or ball bearings typically kill and maim people going back two to three rows in a heavy crowd. (The soldiers in this attack were tightly packed in parade formation.) The force of the explosion and hence the lethality of the device decrease rapidly as the bodies closest to the bomber absorb the blast and shrapnel. An innovative new device or suicide bombing tactic developed by AQAP or erroneous reporting could explain the unusually high body count.
A retaliation attack like this one is unsurprising given the recent Yemeni-led, U.S.-backed offensive against AQAP in Yemen's southern provinces, which has killed dozens of AQAP militants in the past week. This attack indicates that although the southern offensive is costing AQAP, it still can plan and carry out attacks elsewhere in Yemen, including the capital. Thus, even if AQAP no longer holds and controls significant territory, it likely can continue to mount attacks against the Yemeni security and political apparatus. This attack proves that the battle against AQAP is far from over.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Read more: Al Qaeda Responds to the Yemeni Offensive | Stratfor
-
Yemen: Valuable U.S. Asset Killed in Sanaa
October 11, 2012 | 1716 GMT
A Yemeni police car is parked at the scene of the attack on U.S. Embassy security official Qassem Aqlan
Masked gunmen on a motorcycle shot and killed Qassem Aqlan, a foreign security national investigator working for the U.S. Embassy in Sanaa, Yemen, on Oct. 11. In addition to his other responsibilities, Aqlan was investigating the security breach that occurred during the Sept. 13 protests against the embassy -- a task that made him a high-profile target for Yemeni militants. His death will disrupt the investigation and intimidate other investigators and security personnel at the embassy.
Aqlan was a valuable asset. At U.S. Embassies, Regional Security Officers are in charge of security but are assigned to three-year rotations. An investigator like Aqlan, who had reportedly worked for the embassy for 11 years, likely was much more familiar with the security office than were most Regional Security Officers. Moreover, Aqlan liaised with local security forces; losing Aqlan means losing local contacts and knowledge gained through two decades of experience.
The motivation for killing Aqlan seems clear. As a high-profile Foreign Service National Investigator working for the U.S. Embassy, he was critical to securing the embassy and U.S. diplomats. However, such investigators are local employees, and as such they live among the local population. They are not afforded the same level of protection given to U.S. diplomats. Mobile Training Teams from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security offer training to investigators on topics such as surveillance detection, attack recognition and tactical driving. As a longtime investigator in a post as active as Sanaa, Aqlan likely received this type of training on multiple occasions.
Despite this training, local jihadists have demonstrated that their operatives possess sophisticated surveillance, planning and attack tradecraft. Indeed, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula -- Yemen's most active jihadist group -- frequently attacks what it considers vulnerable U.S. targets in its areas of operation, which includes Sanaa, leading to the assassinations of several Yemeni military and intelligence officers.
Reports that motorcycles were used in the attack reveal an effective aspect in militant tradecraft. Motorcycles are popular vehicles for assassinations because they are light and maneuverable and allow the assailants to get close to the target. They are also effective escape vehicles. Unsurprisingly, al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen have used this tactic numerous times to assassinate Yemeni security and government officials.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula very likely was responsible for Aqlan's death. We anticipate that the jihadist group will continue the trend of attacking U.S. interests that began with the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and that other jihadists in the region will follow suit.
Editor's note: An earlier version of this analysis misstated the number of years Aqlan worked for the U.S. Embassy and the nationality of security and government officials assassinated in Yemen.
.
Read more: Yemen: Valuable U.S. Asset Killed in Sanaa | Stratfor
-
The Other Embassy Attack
Tehran tries to turn Yemen into another Lebanon..
Government emails from Libya released this week show Foggy Bottom's finest knew within hours that an Islamist terror group was behind the September 11 attacks that killed four Americans. Maybe this truth drip will force President Obama to explain why his Administration so strenuously downplayed a terrorist connection and insisted an anti-Islamic video was to blame. But amid media and Congressional efforts to uncover the truth about Benghazi, it's worth paying attention to another attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission last month.
On September 13, several hundred people, mostly young men, stormed the Embassy in Yemen's capital of Sanaa. The American staff had been evacuated, but the compound was overrun. In the melee four Yemenis died. At the time the event was lumped in with other anti-American protests in Tunisia, Pakistan and Egypt that week.
Yet it has since become clear that the Yemen assault was also well coordinated, likely by one or more militias. More alarming is an Iranian connection that signals that Tehran is expanding its long and quiet war on America to a new front.
The U.S. isn't ruling out the possible complicity of a Yemeni army faction loyal to ousted President Ali Abdullah Saleh. He stepped down from power in February as part of a U.S.-backed political transition. Since his departure, the military has been divided amid jockeying for control in this tribal society. The Salehs deny the accusation.
During months of anti-government protests in 2011, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) also gained control of territory in central Yemen. The group has several times tried to strike the U.S. mainland, and it may have been behind the assassination this month of a Yemeni security officer employed at the U.S. Embassy.
However, the leading culprit is a Shiite rebel force backed by Tehran. Taking their name from a deceased commander, the Houthi militia have since the mid-1990s fought against the Sunni-dominated government in Sanaa. According to Western officials in Yemen, Iran has provided assistance for a Houthi resurgence in the past year. Their fighters have gone to Iran and Lebanon for training, and money and arms have flowed from both into Yemen, officials say. The Houthis run a satellite TV channel, al-Maseera, from Beirut.
In July the Yemeni government said it had uncovered an Iranian spy ring in Sanaa. That got the attention of the Saudis, who are anxious about Iranian efforts to stir up their co-religionist Shiites in Bahrain, Yemen and most of all in the Kingdom itself.
Tehran's strategy in Yemen calls to mind Lebanon in the 1980s, when Iran built up Hezbollah into what has become the leading political power in Lebanon. The Iran-backed terrorists burst onto the scene by bombing the U.S. embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut. If the Houthis were in the lead last month, the command and control chain runs straight to Tehran.
The interim Yemeni government is also grappling with a separatist armed uprising in the south. One of the leaders of the fractured rebel force lives in Beirut and has tried to build a pro-Iran movement in the south, according to a Western diplomat in Sanaa.
The Houthis and the southerners are separate groups with somewhat different agendas. But Iran may be facilitating a partnership, as well as reaching out to al Qaeda. They have one goal in common: To bring down the pro-American government in Sanaa. "Despite the fact that they're on opposite ends of the religious spectrum, al Qaeda and Iran will cooperate," a Western diplomat says. "You see indications that Iran is helping al Qaeda by trying to forge relations between AQAP, Houthis and southern rebels."
The U.S. supports a "national dialogue" to stabilize Yemen, while waging a drone campaign against the AQAP. Both are commendable goals. Yet Tehran has emerged as a new threat to Yemen's future and is fighting the U.S. through terror proxies. Congress can seek more clarity about Iran's designs with an inquiry into the Sanaa attacks.
-
A New Pattern of Assassinations in Yemen
October 25, 2012 | 1033 GMT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary
A group of Yemeni men survey the scene of security official Qassem Aqlan's Oct. 11 assassination
The tempo of assassinations of military, security and intelligence officers in Sanaa has increased in recent months -- a campaign likely carried out by what appears to be a highly efficient, sophisticated group. Assassinations are common in Yemen, but several unique patterns in the recent killings in Sanaa raise questions about who is responsible. The distinctions highlight challenges that will limit the Yemeni government's ability to deter additional attacks in the near future.
Analysis
Since the beginning of 2012, roughly 60 officials have been killed throughout Yemen. Nearly all the officials worked in the country's military, security or -- most often -- intelligence sectors. Except for occasional assaults in the capital, most of the assassinations have occurred in the southern port city of Aden or its surrounding provinces. The assassins have used a variety of methods -- primarily suicide attacks, sticky bombings and assaults by gunmen.
VIDEO: Yemen's Military Restructuring and Power Balance (Dispatch)
.
In contrast, the recent Sanaa assassinations have been nearly identical in style and have primarily targeted officials specifically involved in counterterrorism activities. Since Aug. 30, armed assailants have killed six Yemeni security officials in Sanaa -- a mix of low- to high-ranking officers, including high-value targets such as a foreign security national investigator working for the U.S. Embassy. The most recent killing in the capital occurred early Oct. 16, when an unidentified gunman on a motorcycle reportedly shot Gen. Khaled al-Hashim, an Iraqi who had reportedly been working with the Yemeni government. So far, none of the assailants have been apprehended.
The Sanaa attacks share several unique hallmarks. Most of the assailants attacked on motorcycles, which allow attackers to maneuver effectively when tracking and approaching targets and then to flee quickly. The consistent use of firearms rather than, say, improvised explosive devices, is also notable. This tactic can be highly effective when employed by well-trained individuals and in the close-range scenarios reportedly common among the Sanaa attacks. The consistency of the tactics employed and the similarities among the officials targeted strongly suggest that a coordinated group of militants have carried out the attacks.
.
The group has also demonstrated an unusual level of tactical efficiency. Each known assassination attempt in Sanaa in the past two months has succeeded (by comparison, the success rate of other recent assassination attempts in Yemen has been much lower). Conducting attacks in Sanaa's heightened security environment requires a high degree of sophistication. Moreover, many of the officials were attacked while traveling either to or from work, indicating that the assailants had a certain degree of operational intelligence. Perhaps most telling, the officials killed were trained intelligence officers who were likely already on alert due to previous assassinations.
Jihadists and Power Struggles
.
Still, the identity of the attackers remains unclear. Militants associated with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula could be to blame since many of the security and intelligence officers killed had been involved in operations against the group. Moreover, unmanned aerial vehicle strikes targeting the al Qaeda franchise in Yemen have increased significantly -- the 36 airstrikes conducted in 2012 are more than the past four years combined -- making retaliation a plausible motive. Indeed, after the government launched a major offensive against the al Qaeda node in June 2012 and continued to attack al Qaeda cells in the south, the group conducted a series of reprisal assaults, including a suicide attack against a police academy in Sanaa on July 11. Tribal Yemenis with family members who were mistakenly targeted or affected by recent airstrikes would also have motivation to seek vengeance.
However, non-jihadist elements could also be responsible. Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi has been attempting to restructure the country's armed forces in order to consolidate power and undermine factions loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Pro-Saleh elements angry about the former president's departure or the military restructuring could well be seeking retribution. Saleh loyalists have responded violently to losses of power in the past. For example, an attack in August by the pro-Saleh Republican Guards on the Yemeni Ministry of Defense was reportedly carried out in response to the military reorganization. More recently, the U.S. Embassy investigator assassinated Oct. 11 was purportedly a member of a team working on the restructuring.
Regardless of who is responsible, attacks on security officers in Sanaa will likely continue. Unless Hadi can consolidate power and balance Yemen's various political factions -- he has been attempting to do so unsuccessfully since he unofficially took power in November 2011 -- the internal government and security forces cannot stabilize Sanaa to the degree necessary to secure the city and suppress the militant threat.
.
Read more: A New Pattern of Assassinations in Yemen | Stratfor
-
Summary
A serious instance of insubordination among Yemeni Republican Guard soldiers April 7 is only the latest indicator that President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi has yet to unify Yemen's armed forces. Hadi's ongoing struggle to consolidate power comes as the central government is simultaneously attempting to manage the threat from al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and Yemen's increasingly violent southern secessionist movement. Although Sanaa has some ability to mitigate these threats, they will become increasingly difficult to manage without a unified military.
Analysis
Several soldiers from Yemen's Fourth Brigade of the Republican Guard and the First Brigade of its mountain infantry reportedly closed down shops and blocked roads in defiance of orders in Radaa, al Bayda province, and seized control of checkpoints normally manned by the Central Security Forces on April 7. The uprising began after al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula captured four Republican Guard soldiers, triggering the outburst from their comrades angry over what they consider steps by their commanders to strip them of their rights.
This was not the first time Yemeni soldiers have disobeyed in order to demonstrate discontentment with the military leadership. The last high-profile instance occurred in August 2012 when a unit of the Republican Guard exchanged fire with forces loyal to the government near the Defense Ministry in Sanaa. That incident was a response to Hadi's announcement of a reorganization of the military and resulted in 93 Republican Guard soldiers being sent to prison.
In an effort to prevent dissent among the ranks, especially among forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, Hadi reshuffled the military in December 2012. This was a clear attempt by Hadi to consolidate power while weakening both Saleh's faction and the faction of Ali Mohsen, Saleh's rival during the 2011 uprising. As part of the reshuffle, Saleh's son, Ahmed Ali Abdullah, was removed as commander of the Republican Guard and the unit was disbanded and integrated into the general ground forces. Similarly, Mohsen was removed as commander of the First Armored Division and the unit was also ordered to integrate into the general ground forces. In coordination with a presidential decree issued April 10, both were given more political and administrative roles rather than direct command of military units: Mohsen was appointed as military adviser to the commander-in-chief for defense affairs and Ahmed Ali Abdullah was appointed as ambassador to the United Arab Emirates.
Though these are significant steps to unify the military, four months after the declaration Hadi's restructuring has yet to take full effect -- something the latest instance of disobedience reflects.
Southern Threats and Government Responses
Hadi's struggle to unify the armed forces comes as threats to government control in Yemen's southern provinces are on the rise. Elements of southern secessionist movement Hirak have increasingly clashed with Yemeni security forces since they declared an armed struggle against the central government Feb. 24. Hirak is not a monolithic movement. Some more moderate members use peaceful protests to promote a negotiated solution to southern demands, such as calls for equal rights and an end to the economic and political marginalization of the south. More radical members have instead opted to attack security forces and energy and oil infrastructure in pursuit of southern independence.
Yemen's north-south divide has been a source of contention since unification in 1990, erupting into civil war in 1994. Although the north and south officially have been united for more than a decade, the regional chasm remains. Whether or not a Yemeni was born in north or south Yemen can be distinguished based on their surname alone, and many Yemenis have remained fiercely loyal to their hometowns and tribes.
.
Meanwhile, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula continues to pose an unrelenting threat to the Yemeni state. Although al Qaeda militants no longer administer towns in Abyan province as they did during the nationwide unrest in 2011 and 2012, its attacks against military targets have persisted.
Hadi has various options for countering al Qaeda. Sanaa receives intelligence on the group along with financial and logistical support from Saudi Arabia and direct support from the United States for Yemeni airstrikes and other military campaigns against militants. But airstrikes alone will not eliminate al Qaeda's network in Yemen. Worse, inaccurate strikes that harm Yemeni civilians can radicalize communities against the government.
In addition to airstrikes and military campaigns, the government has sought to prevent al Qaeda from expanding its operations by employing local tribes to fight the militants, a tactic also used during Saleh's regime. How long the government can rely on these tribes to do its bidding remains unclear, however, due to the fluid nature of their loyalties, which are guided by financial incentives from Saudi benefactors or from rival factions within Yemen.
Despite these tactics, al Qaeda has continued to mount attacks against Yemeni security forces. As with the recent mutiny of Republican Guard soldiers in Radaa, this could expose divisions within the armed forces.
To combat Hirak, the government has attempted to engage its peaceful elements in talks via the country's national dialogue. So far, no consensus has been reached. How much trying to marginalize the militants by talking to the moderates will help the government remains unclear. Even if such talks were to succeed, the government would not accept the demands of the more radical elements, such as their calls for two separate states. In addition to talks, the government has increased its security presence in the southern provinces to combat violent elements of Hirak. Thus far, however, more security forces in the south have only created more targets for the militant factions of Hirak. As with al Qaeda, increased clashes between security forces and Hirak could widen rifts within the Yemeni armed forces.
Unrest Ahead
If violent elements of the Hirak movement continue to grow and the military and central government remain disjointed, increased contact between security forces and the southern separatists could cause military units to split along geographic lines. If the soldiers from the south began to side with Hirak against northerners, another civil war could break out. Although this scenario does not appear imminent, since unrest in the south is still manageable, it remains possible -- especially given Yemen's history of north-south conflict under weak central governments.
Although it is unlikely that Yemen will ever fully rid itself of its various militant and separatist threats, a stronger central government with a unified military could balance the groups off each other and confront the groups should they become too strong -- something Saleh managed during most of his three decades in power. But without a united military and a strong government, Sanaa cannot mitigate these threats. Since this situation seems likely to persist in the immediate future, further destabilization in Yemen is likely.
Read more: Yemen Confronts Militants and Separatists | Stratfor
-
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/06/how_we_lost_yemen_al_qaeda
-
First, a comment on the previous post, Foreign Policy: How we "lost" Yemen. I notice Crafty has quote marks around "lost". Excellent article, loaded with facts and great analysis, yet I (too) question the title concluding that "we" "lost" Yemen. It isn't all about us, and it isn't all lost. But it does seem to be the focal point of AQ style terrorism at the moment and certainly warrants our attention.
-----------
http://www.hughhewitt.com/the-snake-den-a-primer-on-yemen-by-john-ford/
THE SNAKE DEN: A PRIMER ON YEMEN By John Ford
To understand Yemen you must begin by understanding that there is very little reason for Yemen to be a country. In fact, until very recently it wasn’t a country at all. For most of the last 500 years, Yemen has been divided into a north and a south. The Northern part of Yemen is predominately Shia Muslim. Until 1918 it was dominated by the Ottoman Empire and after that it was an independent country dominated by the Zaidi Shia.
South Yemen was a British protectorate. The port of Aden was valuable to Britain as a fueling station on the way to India. It remained under British control from the mid-19th century until independence in 1967. Its population and economy were much smaller than that of North Yemen and its people were predominately Sunni Muslim but it still had one very important seaport in Aden.
After centuries of being divided first by imperial powers and then by the borders drawn by Imperial powers the two Yemens were united in 1990. North Yemen would be the senior partner in the marriage by virtue of being much larger in population and its President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, would be the President of the new united Yemen. Ali Salim al-Bidh, the President of South Yemen would be Vice President. The arrangements of Yemen’s merger set the stage for the serious problems Yemen faces today.
First, Saleh was an erratic personality. He called his political strategy for governing Yemen “dancing on the heads of snakes”. He was a bumbling would-be Machiavelli of the Arabian Desert whose modus operandi was to switch government patronage from one tribe to another and back again in such a manner that he was sure to alienate all parties. He began his administration of Yemen by siding with Saddam Hussein in the Persian Gulf War and promptly lost nearly all his foreign aid when Saddam was defeated. Since 9/11, he posed as an ally against terrorism and took American aid to fight al Qaeda while he quietly coddled Salafi extremists. He seemed at times to connive for the pure joy of conniving and he spent his 20 years as President steadily losing one group of supporters after another until he was forced out of office during the Arab Spring.
Second, Saleh’s ruling coalition as President of North Yemen had been based on the support of his fellow Zaidi Shia, who comprised a slim majority of the population of North Yemen. But in the unified Yemen, the addition of almost exclusively Sunni southern Yemen gave the country a slight majority of Sunni Muslims. This prompted Saleh to switch patronage over time to the Sunnis and away from the Zaidi Shia and this in turn helped lead to a revolt against Saleh’s government by people who had once been his political base.
Yemen’s weak government and religious divisions helped set the stage for the civil war that began in 1994. Al-Bidh, Saleh’s Vice President, tried to launch a secession movement to break the south off from the newly united Yemen. As former President of South Yemen his power base was in the lightly populated south. He found himself increasingly marginalized in Saleh’s northern dominated government as resources were diverted towards the powerful Zaidi sheiks that Saleh depended on for support. Saleh won the civil war, but the country he won was severely damaged by the conflict. Saleh came out of the war having concluded that his Zaidi-dominated government was not durable in a majority Sunni country. He began to tilt towards Sunnis, increasing the patronage bestowed on Sunni tribes at the expense of the Zaidi (Even though Saleh was himself a Zaidi). By the decade’s end, Saleh’s government was dominated by Sunnis.
Yemen’s problems also made it a perfect target for al Qaeda. Yemen became a hotbed of al Qaeda activity in the late 1990s. An al Qaeda cell based in Aden bombed an American destroyer, the USS Cole, in 1999. Three years later, another attack occurred when Yemen based al Qaeda terrorists hit the Limburg, an oil tanker, off the coast near Aden. Saleh did not intend to repeat his mistake of supporting Saddam during the Gulf War. He saw the al Qaeda threat was of paramount importance to the US. He worked to ingratiate himself to the Americans and struck a pose as an ally in the War on Terror.
But while he was taking American aid he would not separate himself completely from some of his extremist allies. Saleh always appeared to be playing a double-game with the US on the terrorism issue. On the one hand, Saleh would allow American drone strikes like the one that killed al Qaeda leaders like Qaed al-Harithi and Anwar al-Awlawki to occur on his soil.
On the other hand, there were a series of suspicious “escapes” by terror suspects from Yemeni jails. In the most egregious jailbreak incident 23 terrorists escaped a jail in the capital city of Sanaa by tunneling into a women’s bathroom in a mosque next door to the prison. One of the escapees, Nasir al-Wuhayshi, is now the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and the second highest ranking member of al Qaeda in the world. Few observers believe this escape was possible without help from the prison guards. While Saleh tried to play games with al Qaeda the terror group grew in strength and now controls large swaths of Yemen’s interior. The group is becoming stronger every day and now threatens to take control of the port of Aden.
Al Qaeda was not the only problem Saleh faced after 9/11. Saleh’s tilt towards the Sunnis had alienated his Zaidi allies. His alliance with the US had alienated them further. In 2004, a powerful family of Zaidi Shia called the al-Houthi began to lead organized protests against the government. The government overreacted massively by arresting hundreds of protests and killing the leader of the protest movement, Sheikh Hussein al-Houthi. The government’s crackdown sparked a broader revolution of Zaidi Shia. The revolution has become extremely violent and has killed 25,000 people since it began in 2004 and left 250,000 more internally displaced.
By 2011, Saleh’s position had become untenable. In the north, he faced a broad based rebellion of his own Zaidi sect led by the al-Houthis who were receiving arms from Iran. In the country’s center and south, he faced a growing al Qaeda insurgency that was beginning to take control of entire towns. Yemen’s security services were unable to win this two-front war. Saleh’s government was toppled during the Arab Spring.
The post-Saleh government of Yemen is sandwiched between two insurgencies it cannot seem to control. The United States continues to send substantial foreign aid to the government of Yemen in the hopes that Yemen’s government will be able to contain these twin rebellions but it is now obvious that as time goes by AQAP grows stronger while the central government grows weaker.
The US has no interest in seeing al Qaeda take control of Yemen and turn it into a base from which it can launch attacks against western targets. Nor does it wish to see the Houthi rebellion take control if it would increase Iranian influence in the Arabian Peninsula. It cannot afford to simply ignore the problems in Yemen. As the attack on the Cole and the Limburg show, a terrorist dominated Yemen would be a severe threat to international shipping. A terrorist safe haven for al Qaeda anywhere would be a base from which al Qaeda could launch attacks against American interests around the world.
The hope going forward is that Yemen’s government will be less duplicitous now that Saleh is gone and that it will stop playing a double game between the US and al Qaeda. For the moment, the US has no real choice but to continue to prop up Yemen’s government in the hope that it can roll back the two insurgencies it faces. This task will prove difficult because Yemen has no natural reason to be a country and the two insurgencies fall along Yemen’s natural dividing line going back for hundreds of years: A Zaidi Shia north and a Sunni dominated south.
For further reading:
“Yemen: Dancing on the Heads of Snakes” by Victoria Clark
“The Last Refuge: Yemen, Al Qaeda, and America’s War in Arabia” by Gregory Johnsen
“High Value Target: Countering al Qaeda in Yemen” by Ambassador Edmund Hull
-
Armed gunmen assaulted Yemen's Central Security Prison on Thursday, freeing at least 14 inmates potentially associated with al Qaeda. The attack on Yemen's main security prison, located in the capital Sana'a, allegedly began with a car bomb explosion at the prison's entrance. Militants engaged in a prolonged firefight with Yemeni security officials near the prison gates and reportedly used car bombs and grenades to break into the structure. Yemeni security forces report that seven policemen and three militants were killed in the attack, and several others were wounded. No group has yet claimed responsibility for the attack, but Yemen is facing a growing threat from al Qaeda within its borders. The Yemeni al Qaeda branch, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), has conducted numerous militant operations against Yemeni state structures in the past year, including a brutal attack against Yemen's defense ministry in December 2013.
-
Our side was making some noise the other day when AQAP released a video of a big open air meeting. Maybe we were premature. It now looks like AQAP got a bit too cocky.
========================
Air strikes in southern Yemen have killed more than 40 suspected al Qaeda militants as well as three civilians over the past three days. According to the defense ministry strikes on Saturday and Sunday were launched as part of the government's efforts to combat terrorism. A source from the High Security Committee said Sunday's strikes targeted a southern mountainous region between Abyan, Shabwa, and Bayda provinces and were based on information that "terrorist elements were planning to target vital civilian and military installations." A government official said the operation was conducted in collaboration with the United States but did not reference drone strikes, however local sources said drones had been seen circling the target areas prior to the strikes. According to the New America Foundation, the United States has carried out over 100 drone strikes in Yemen since 2002.
-
Yemen Confirms 55 Militants Killed in Joint Aerial Campaign
________________________________________
Yemen's interior ministry confirmed that 55 al Qaeda linked militants were killed in what a Yemeni official called an "unprecedented" joint aerial campaign between Yemen and the United States in the mountainous Abyan, Shabwa, and Bayda provinces from Saturday to Monday. Air strikes, possibly from U.S. drones, reportedly targeted a training camp as well as several vehicles in the region. Another Yemeni official estimated the number of dead in the 40s. According to the interior ministry, three senior members of al Qaeda were among the fatalities as well as three civilians. Additionally, reports suggest Ibrahim al-Asiri, al Qaeda's chief bomb maker, may have been killed in an ambush over the weekend by U.S. backed special forces. Since the weekend's strikes, gunmen have killed four senior security officers, according to Yemeni officials.
-
U.S. Officers Kill Armed Civilians in Yemen Capital
A United States Special Operations commando and a Central Intelligence Agency officer in Yemen shot and killed two armed Yemeni civilians who tried to kidnap them while the Americans were in a barber shop in the country’s capital two weeks ago, American officials said on Friday.
The two Americans were whisked out of the volatile Middle East nation within a few days of the shooting, with the blessing of the Yemeni government, two senior American officials said.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/10/world/middleeast/us-officers-kill-armed-civilians-in-yemen-capital.html?emc=edit_na_20140509
-
http://www.funker530.com/al-qaeda-wipes-out-rival-militant-encampment-hd/
-
http://www.funker530.com/al-qaeda-wipes-out-rival-militant-encampment-hd/
An obscure YouTube video must be to blame.
-
Share
In Yemen, a Rebel Advance Could Topple the Regime
Analysis
July 29, 2014 | 0407 Print Text Size
Yemen's Escalating Houthi Conflict
Shia loyal to the al-Houthi movement ride past Yemeni soldiers near Yaz, Yemen, in May. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)
Summary
The success of a rebel campaign in northern Yemen is threatening to destabilize the already weak and overwhelmed government in Sanaa. After capturing the city of Amran, a mere 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the capital, in early July, the rebels from the al-Houthi tribe are in their strongest position yet. The Yemeni government is developing plans to divide the country into six federal regions, and the rebels believe this is their chance to claim territory for the future bargaining.
The central government is nearly powerless to fend off the rebels; its forces are already stretched thin. Neighboring Saudi Arabia has intervened in Yemen before and still supports Sunni tribes in the north, but the risk of inciting a Shiite backlash or creating space for jihadists to move in could deter another intervention.
Analysis
Followers of Zaidi Islam, a branch of Shiism, ruled northern Yemen intermittently for centuries before the Yemen Arab Republic was created after a coup in 1962. The Sunni-led government in Sanaa has since marginalized and repressed the Zaidis, who account for 40 percent of Yemen's population. The Zaidis were left to administer their rugged and resource-poor redoubt in northwestern Yemen's Saada province.
In 2004, the al-Houthi tribe, a member of the Zaidi order, rallied Yemen's Shia to reverse decades of subjugation. The tribe led an insurgency from its mountainous territory in the north against Saudi-backed Wahhabi and Salafist tribesmen and the Yemeni military, both of which the al-Houthis believed were encroaching on historically Zaidi territory. Five more bouts of fighting over six years failed to produce any changes on the ground.
Over time, the al-Houthi rebels became an effective insurgent force of more than 10,000 fighters. By the time Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh was deposed in 2011, the al-Houthis were strong enough to exploit the ensuing power vacuum. They captured Saada city, installed a governor and began collecting taxes and directing the local government. They also began to openly contest tribal control of adjacent territory in al-Jawf, Hajja and Amran provinces.
Conflict Zones
Click to Enlarge
Al-Houthi Advance
The latest round of violence began in October, when al-Houthi and Salafist fighters clashed in Dammaj in northern Yemen. Many groups and tribes had targeted the al-Houthis over the years, viewing them as a threat to their influence or territory in the north.
The al-Houthis launched a major offensive after Yemen's January National Dialogue Conference, which designated a year to draft a new constitution and proposed dividing the country into six regions. The offensive was intended to pressure Sanaa into bending on important territorial disputes during the constitution-writing process.
The tribe is displeased with the demarcation of its region, Azal, which has no access to the Red Sea, a large population and little in terms of water or natural resources. The al-Houthis claim rights to coastal Hajja province, including the valuable al-Midi port to the north, and al-Jawf province, which is within reach of Yemen's central oil fields. They have also rejected the Azal region's connection to the overcrowded and distant Dhamar province.
Proposed Regions of Yemen
Click to Enlarge
Over the course of a month the al-Houthi rebels gained territory in Hajja and al-Jawf, took the town of Kitaf near the Saudi border and forced the Salafists of Dammaj to retreat south to Sanaa. The focus of the offensive was Amran province, which the Ahmar clan (leaders of Yemen's most powerful tribe, the Hashid tribe) has historically dominated and through which the region's largest highway runs to the capital. By early February, the al-Houthis held most of northern Amran province and had expelled the Ahmars from their home district, Khamir. Notably, anti-Ahmar and anti-government tribes, reportedly including supporters of former president Saleh, joined the rebels' military campaign.
The Yemeni government has been unable to divert forces from other regions to reinforce Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar's 310th Brigade, which has been battling the al-Houthi rebels for more than a decade. The Yemeni armed forces are busy containing al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula activities, which are spreading from the country's southeast. Meanwhile, southern secessionists are threatening the country's unity, and tribal militants are threatening its infrastructure.
Despite several short-lived government-brokered cease-fires, heavy fighting continues in Amran, and the al-Houthis have been able to acquire large stockpiles of heavy weaponry and armaments left by withdrawing military forces and tribesmen. With rebels closing in on the capital in early June, President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi approved airstrikes against al-Houthi positions in Amran for the first time since the fighting resumed in October. By July 10, however, the al-Houthi rebels had taken Amran city itself, including the 310th Brigade's headquarters and armaments within the city.
Hadi announced July 23 that an agreement had been reached to return Amran to state control, but the al-Houthis will remain on the outskirts and will ensure that no threatening forces are allowed to move back into the city. Moreover, their advance, which the Iranians quietly encouraged, has raised concern in Saudi Arabia.
The Sectarian Divide in Northern Yemen
Click to Enlarge
A Proxy War
For Iran, Yemen's Shiite insurgency is an opportunity to distract its rivals in Saudi Arabia and eat up their resources, keeping them from focusing on regional theaters in which Tehran has bigger interests. Tehran can use its support for the Shia in Yemen as leverage during exchanges with Riyadh over sectarian competition in Syria, Bahrain, Lebanon and Iraq. Over the years, Iran has provided the al-Houthi rebels with limited materiel and financial support and has reportedly directed Hezbollah operatives and potentially Quds Force commanders to help train and direct the rebels.
The Saudis are concerned that the violence, or the al-Houthis' ambitions of autonomy, may spill over into Saudi territory. Saudi Arabia is home to a small Shiite population in its mountainous territories in the southwest, and a far larger Shiite population in its oil-rich Eastern province. In fact, when al-Houthi rebels in 2009 showed signs of overwhelming Yemeni forces and carried out small-scale operations in Saudi territory, Riyadh massed troops on the border and initiated serious airstrikes against rebel positions in northern Yemen until the al-Houthis capitulated.
As in the past, Saudi Arabia's ability to contain the al-Houthis depends on its ties to northern Yemen's conservative tribes, which Riyadh has historically supported financially to oppose the Shia. Nevertheless, the Saudis' influence over the tribes has waned, especially since Riyadh denounced the Muslim Brotherhood, effectively alienating the powerful al-Islah opposition group -- whose inner circle is dominated by the Ahmar family -- and its affiliated tribesmen.
There is also the fear that Saudi aid may find its way into the hands of jihadists in the north, particularly with the Islamic State expanding its influence in the region and threatening to strike in Saudi Arabia. If recent developments are any indication, such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula's decision to create a unit tasked to combat the al-Houthi rebels and the July 4 jihadist attack on the Wadia border post, Riyadh's fears are well-founded.
With Yemen largely unable to contain the rebel threat and the al-Houthis sitting on the outskirts of the capital, the Saudis could consider a military incursion similar to the one they conducted in 2009. There have been several recent high-level Yemeni-Saudi talks, including a July 8 meeting between Hadi and King Abdullah in Riyadh and a July 23 unannounced visit by Yemeni Defense Minister Muhammad Nasir Ahmad to the kingdom. Riyadh is likely providing selective assistance to the more moderate Salafist fighters in northern Yemen -- as it has in the past -- to strike back against al-Houthi territorial gains. Nevertheless, the Saudis must take care not to incite the Shia, particularly in Saudi Arabia's own southern territory, or to allow al Qaeda or Islamic State jihadists to fill the security vacuum in northern Yemen that would follow an intervention.
A Fragile Regime
The al-Houthis are unlikely to advance into Sanaa. They recognize the risk of reprisal from the Saudi military, are wary of triggering a nationalist response that unites northern tribesmen against them and are trying not to spread their forces too thin. The al-Houthis will also probably limit the expansion of their operations northward for fear of repeating the mistakes of 2009, when fighting spread too close to the Saudi border.
Nevertheless, the rebels will work to consolidate control in the territory they have captured and to undermine the support of their Sunni rivals, particularly the Ahmar family. The al-Houthis will also work to strengthen their defensive lines in anticipation of limited counterattacks by Yemeni armed forces and of growing jihadist activity. Yemen's leaders may be flexible on some of the al-Houthi rebels' demands regarding border demarcation and autonomy, but they are unlikely to concede on the al-Houthis' overarching desire for greater autonomy.
More important, the al-Houthi offensive comes at an inopportune time for the Yemeni regime. A large share of Sanaa's military forces have been busy combating al Qaeda elements in Shabwa and Abyan provinces since April. The Hadi regime is also struggling to contain secessionist activity in the south after one of the secessionist movement's most prominent leaders escaped from house arrest and vowed to renew the struggle. Within the government and military, supporters of Saleh are increasingly challenging Hadi; coup rumors came out twice in June. Finally, frequent militant attacks on energy infrastructure have hurt oil and natural gas production, and protests have grown over water, fuel and electricity shortages.
Despite Saudi assistance, Yemen's internal pressures have put Hadi's regime in its most fragile state since the 2011 uprising. The regime could be at risk of breaking down in the near future.
Read more: In Yemen, a Rebel Advance Could Topple the Regime | Stratfor
-
http://allenbwest.com/2014/08/monster-grows-al-qaida-yemen-announces-support-isis/
-
Yemeni Rebels Maneuver the Government into Talks
Analysis
August 22, 2014 | 1223 Print Text Size
Yemeni Rebels Maneuver the Government into Talks
Followers of the Shiite al-Houthi group watch Shiite leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi speaking on a giant screen during a rally marking the birthday of the Prophet Mohammed at a football stadium on Jan. 13. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)
Summary
Yemen's al-Houthi rebels, affiliated with the Zaidi sect of Shi'ism found in northern Yemen, have capitalized on their recent territorial gains and are now effectively laying siege to the capital and threatening to topple the Sunni government. Rebel leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi's recent moves coincide with the demoralization of Yemen's military from continued losses and Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi's inability to manage the country's competing interests.
The al-Houthis and their armed tribal allies do not seem likely to try to occupy the capital by force, aware of the potential domestic and foreign repercussions of such a move. Rather, al-Houthi will use the rebel threat to force Hadi's government to make concessions. Hadi will likely make political compromises, such as removing Cabinet and senior leadership officials, rework the boundaries of a proposed federalization plan, and offer the al-Houthis both a larger role within the government and greater local autonomy, making them more powerful within Yemen. This would also allow the al-Houthis' traditional supporters in Iran to threaten their Saudi rivals to the north. Perhaps more importantly, political unrest will force Hadi to shift more of his limited military forces toward the capital, giving actors such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and southern secessionist forces an opportunity to expand their areas of influence.
Analysis
Yemenis are quite familiar with the concept of northern highland tribesmen marching on Sanaa. Twice before -- first in the 17th century and then again in 1911 -- the armies of Yemen's Zaidi imamate laid siege to Sanaa and ousted its Ottoman rulers. In the midst of northern Yemen's civil war (1962-1970), the Saudi-backed Zaidi royalists bombarded Sanaa for nearly four months before ceding it to the control of the newly formed Yemen Arab Republic. This time, the al-Houthis, fresh from a string of battlefield successes against their traditional rivals within Yemen's armed forces and northern Sunni tribes, have acquired advanced weaponry and occupy strategic territory north of Sanaa.
However, in a televised speech on Aug. 17, al-Houthi demanded that Hadi overturn a recently implemented and unpopular fuel subsidy cut and dissolve the Cabinet led by Prime Minister Mohammed Basindwa. Al-Houthi also demanded that a more representative governing body be established and ordered his supporters to stage demonstrations on the streets of Yemen until the government conceded. He gave president Hadi a deadline of Aug. 22, after which he threatened to use alternative measures.
Conflict Zones
Click to Enlarge
Over the past week, thousands of al-Houthi supporters have taken to the streets of Sanaa and set up camps at most of the main approaches to the city. By Aug. 22, demonstrators had established more camps within the city and were gathered around key government buildings, while al-Houthi fighters built fortifications in the mountains surrounding Sanaa. In response, Hadi held an extraordinary emergency meeting with his army leadership to enact emergency plans, distributing the elite Presidential Forces at key positions throughout the city and calling up the Fourth Brigade of Yemen's reservists. Reports from the local newspaper Aden al-Ghad on Aug. 20 claimed that the Yemeni air force transferred dozens of military aircraft from Sanaa's airport to nearby air bases to prevent them from falling into al-Houthi hands in anticipation of potential hostilities.
The Rebels Accumulate Influence
By framing the call for demonstrations as a general protest against deteriorating social conditions and fuel subsidy cuts, al-Houthi is trying to tap into pre-existing popular frustrations. Hadi is aware that his predecessor was forced to step down following mass protests in 2011, and knows he is in a dangerous position while the local population suffers from high unemployment, insufficient water and electricity supplies, and a lack of government services. Steep increases in gasoline and diesel prices, which make it more expensive to transport goods and run generators, have further exacerbated these tensions. In response, Hadi quickly called for a dialogue with the al-Houthi leadership Aug. 20, inviting the al-Houthis to join a new unity government and sending a 10-member negotiating committee headed by Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Abid bin Daghr to Saada. Reports also surfaced Aug. 19 that a Yemeni delegation had left to negotiate with the Iranians -- using Oman as an intermediary -- to convince the al-Houthis to cease hostilities.
Despite al-Houthi's military posturing, it remains unlikely that he will order his armed forces into the capital. Such a move would only expose his fighters to potential urban fighting against local security forces and militant Sunnis and tie down large portions of the rebels' manpower in occupying Sanaa. Doing so would also serve to unite northern tribesmen and Salafist militants -- potentially including elements who were previously neutral or supportive of the Zaidi cause -- against the al-Houthis. Even potential reprisals from Saudi Arabia -- which initiated an airstrike campaign that forced the capitulation of the al-Houthis when they appeared likely to overwhelm Yemeni forces in 2009 -- may convince the rebels to avoid movements that would force Riyadh to check the Shiite threat across its southern border. Nevertheless, Stratfor is closely watching the situation for any signs of a shift in this calculation in the near future.
Instead of pushing into the capital, al-Houthi will try to use his forces to intimidate Hadi into concessions on longstanding political issues. The Yemen Times on Aug. 21 cited sources claiming that the al-Houthis are demanding 10 ministry positions in the future government, the right to maintain their arms and that some 20,000 of their supporters be integrated into the national military -- in addition to their initial demands that fuel subsidy cuts be overturned and the government resign. They have also included their demand that the Hajja and al-Jawf governorates be included in their proposed federal region, which would grant them access to the Red Sea and hydrocarbon reserves. As a signal that negotiations are making initial progress, al-Houthi in a televised speech on Aug. 21 urged his supporters to continue their demonstrations through the weekend -- beyond the initial deadline -- but without resorting to violence.
The Sectarian Divide in Northern Yemen
Click to Enlarge
Sanaa's Likely Response
With most of his military units tied down in other regions of the country and those based near Sanaa demoralized by repeated defeats at the hands of the al-Houthis, Hadi likely will be forced to capitulate to al-Houthi pressure. Hadi probably will remain in power, as the al-Houthis have avoided criticizing him directly and know there are few alternative candidates who could take Hadi's position. However, at a minimum, Hadi will probably be forced to dissolve his Cabinet, demand Basindwa's resignation and overturn the controversial fuel subsidy cuts. The formation of a national unity government with the al-Houthis entitled to a share of key positions and adjustments to the federalization plan are likely to be key areas of negotiation and probable concession. In fact, Stratfor's sources within Yemen have indicated that al-Houthi will settle for regional autonomy and greater representation within the central government.
The prospect of a more politically involved al-Houthi movement with increased autonomy will unnerve the Saudis, who are keen on limiting Shiite unrest in their own territories and are worried that Iran could use the al-Houthis to stir up trouble on their southern border. The potential for another Saudi intervention remains, although Riyadh's influence within Yemen's political and tribal landscape has deteriorated over the past few years, limiting Saudi options. For Iran, an empowered al-Houthi resistance is a valuable tool to use in bargaining with the Saudis over more critical interests, such as Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.
However, perhaps the most import outcome of this week's political strife in Sanaa is the potential blowback in other regions of Yemen. Groups such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the southern secessionist Hirak movement could capitalize on Yemen's security focus on the al-Houthi threat by expanding their influence. If political instability becomes protracted, power vacuums could develop in some of the more remote regions of Yemen, allowing these groups to pose greater threats to the central government.
Read more: Yemeni Rebels Maneuver the Government into Talks | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook
-
Yemen's Divides Could Lead to Shiite Power Gains
Media Center, Image
August 26, 2014 | 1137 Print Text Size
Yemen's Divides Could Lead to Shiite Power Gains
Click to Enlarge
Yemen's al-Houthi rebels, who are affiliated with the Zaidi sect of Shi'ism found in northern Yemen, have capitalized on their recent territorial gains and are now using their position to pressure the capital by threatening to topple the Sunni-led government. Yemen's military is demoralized after suffering repeated defeat at the hands of rebels led by Abdul-Malik al-Houthi and Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi has proved unable to manage the country's competing interests.
Aware of the potential domestic and foreign repercussions that would result from such a move, the al-Houthis and their armed tribal allies do not seem likely to try to occupy the capital by force. Rather, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi will use the rebel threat to force Hadi's government to make political concessions. Perhaps more importantly, political unrest will force Hadi to shift more of his limited military forces toward the capital, giving actors such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and southern secessionist forces an opportunity to expand their areas of influence.
Eventually, Hadi likely will be forced to capitulate to al-Houthi pressure. Hadi will probably remain in power, as the al-Houthis have avoided criticizing him directly and are aware that there are few alternative candidates. However, at a minimum, Hadi will likely be forced to dissolve his Cabinet, demand Prime Minister Mohammed Basindwa's resignation and overturn controversial fuel subsidy cuts. Key areas of negotiation, and probable concession, will probably include the formation of a national unity government that would include the al-Houthis and adjustments to the federalization plan. In fact, Stratfor's sources within Yemen have indicated that al-Houthi will settle for regional autonomy and greater representation within the central government.
-
Zaidis Re-Emerge on Yemen's Political Scene
Analysis
October 2, 2014 | 0415 Print Text Size
The Re-Emergence of the Zaidis on Yemen's Political Scene
Yemeni Zaidis shout slogans during a protest outside the headquarters of Yemen's national security service in Sanaa on June 10, 2013. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)
Summary
For the first time since the fall of its imamate in 1962, northern Yemen's Zaidi community, which follows a branch of Shiite Islam, is poised to play a defining role in the country's political transition. Led by the charismatic Abdul-Malik al-Houthi and his tribesmen, the northern Zaidis have emerged as the best-organized and most effective fighting force in Yemen and have strong-armed the weak and divided regime in Sanaa into conceding to several key demands. With the regime's traditional backers in Riyadh lacking options and state security forces spread thin on multiple fronts, the al-Houthis will try to capitalize on recent victories to ensure a greater Zaidi political stake in Sanaa, as well as greater autonomy for their own mountainous region in the north. In due time, the re-emergence of the al-Houthis will provide Iran with a key point of leverage in negotiations with its Saudi adversary, but it could also lead to security and political vacuums that groups such as the Southern Secessionist Movement and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula could exploit.
Analysis
Following weeks of demonstrations in Sanaa by thousands of Zaidis — many of whom were armed — that did not result in the Sunni-dominated government's capitulation, the al-Houthis adopted more aggressive measures. During clashes that left more than 150 dead between Sept. 18 and 20, al-Houthi militants besieged and occupied key government buildings, including the Defense Ministry, an army command center, the parliament building, the central bank and the state television compound. In part because local troops and security forces offered little resistance to the al-Houthis, Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi's government had little choice but to sign a U.N.-brokered deal with the Shiite rebels Sept. 21.
Click to Enlarge
Under the terms of the agreement, Prime Minister Mohammed Salim Basindawa would step down and be replaced by a neutral candidate within three days. Though Basindawa did step down, his replacement has yet to be named. Unpopular cuts to fuel subsidies, which had provided the initial impetus for al-Houthi demonstrations, were rolled back by around 25 percent, and Hadi is now required to take on a presidential adviser from both the al-Houthi and southern secessionist camps. More important, according to the agreement, a national unity government guided by a new constitution is to be formed within the month, with the al-Houthis reportedly set to take over several key Cabinet positions. In exchange, Abdul-Malik agreed to remove his supporters' camps from Sanaa's outskirts and to return occupied buildings to state control. Both sides have yet to follow through on many of their commitments, however, and heavy fighting between al-Houthis and their tribal and Islamist rivals continues in al-Jawf province, northeast of the capital.
The Saudi Factor
Saudi Arabia, which initiated an air campaign against the al-Houthis in 2009 when the group's military strength threatened to overwhelm Yemeni security forces, has remained strangely quiet over the past few weeks. Part of this may reflect the diminished influence the Saudis have had with their traditional partners in northern Yemen since the country's 2011 uprising. The Saudi policy of confronting regional Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations has alienated two of Riyadh's most important allies in Yemen: the powerful al-Ahmar tribal clan and former commander of the First Armored Division Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar (no relation), both powerful players within Yemen's Muslim Brotherhood branch, the al-Islah party. Stratfor sources in Sanaa have highlighted Riyadh's deteriorating ties within northern Yemen's tribal landscape, which is increasingly identifying with Islamist and jihadist ideologies that pose immediate threats to the kingdom's interests.
More important, Riyadh is reluctant to intervene in northern Yemen because it is preoccupied with its involvement in Syria and fears Islamic State activity could spread to Saudi Arabia. Now a formal participant in the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State in eastern Syria, Saudi Arabia cannot afford to be tied down militarily on two fronts and does not want to risk upsetting its own restive Shiite minority, which may sympathize with the al-Houthis, particularly those in southwestern Saudi Arabia. Riyadh also has an immediate stake in the future of Iraq's Sunni community, leaving the kingdom with little reserve bandwidth to deal with developments toward its southwestern border. In many ways, a resurgent Zaidi powerbroker in Yemen could satisfy Riyadh's short-term interests by ensuring some form of stability in historically restive northern Yemen and by keeping al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula's activities focused on the Shia as opposed to the Saudis. At the moment, the al-Houthis may represent the lesser of two evils from the Saudi perspective, a concept supported by our Yemeni sources.
Another actor who has remained quiet throughout Yemen's crisis is former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, of Zaidi descent himself, who is rumored to retain clandestine ties with some al-Houthi elements and who has actively sought to counter Hadi's control of the state. As a result of his 22 years in power, Saleh reportedly enjoys a substantial patronage network within Yemen's armed forces despite Hadi's attempts over the past few years to replace senior commanders with his own cadre of supporters. However, the relative ease with which the al-Houthis managed to occupy a city of 2 million and the lack of direct confrontation between security forces and al-Houthi militants remains suspicious. Indeed, most reports indicate that there were instances where the military and police units simply handed over institutions and districts. In some cases, authorities reportedly ordered security personnel to avoid antagonizing the rebels. Hadi himself has described the developments as part of a well-planned coup, and Foreign Minister Jamal al-Salal alleged during his speech at the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 29 that the al-Houthis had received political and logistical support from the former regime. Stratfor will be closely monitoring Saleh's activities over the coming weeks in the event the former president attempts to capitalize on Hadi's current predicament.
Click to Enlarge
At the moment, there is no other cohesive force that could effectively challenge al-Houthi military might in northern Yemen. The Yemeni armed forces are spread thin on multiple fronts, carrying out campaigns against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula — particularly in Shabwa, Abyan and, most recently, Hadramawt provinces — while containing secessionists in the south and rebellious tribes in Marib. Brigades operating in northern Yemen who fall under the sixth military district have suffered humiliating and repeated defeats at the hands of the al-Houthis, and many remain fractured and scattered. Tribesmen loyal to al-Islah and the al-Ahmars have been pushed out of much of their traditional territory in the north by the al-Houthis and have struggled to contain al-Houthi offensives in al-Jawf province. It remains to be seen whether al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula can pose an effective challenge to the Zaidi rebels of northern Yemen.
Central Authority Erodes
The al-Houthis will work to take advantage of the existing security vacuum, and Saudi Arabia's lack of options will likely pressure Hadi into additional political concessions in the near future. To achieve this end, Abdel-Malik will use his ability to incite a new round of violence in the capital to his advantage and will continue military offensives in al-Jawf. When the new Cabinet is eventually announced, the al-Houthis will likely acquire several key ministerial positions. As Sanaa continues its constitutional drafting process, the al-Houthis will look to redefine the boundaries of their proposed federal region to include Hajja province, which will offer the group formal access to the Red Sea, and al-Jawf province, which is strategically located near central Yemen's large Marib oil fields. By expanding territory beyond their traditional capital-intensive, mountainous enclave of Saada and by forging a greater role in Yemen's political process, the Zaidis could ensure a degree of autonomy for themselves not seen since the times of the imamate.
For Iran, a country long suspected of providing funding, armaments and training to the Shiite al-Houthis, the rise of the Zaidis is a strategic victory in its proxy war against Riyadh. As Iran and Saudi Arabia vie for influence in states such as Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, the al-Houthi role in Yemen will be an increasingly important bargaining chip. In many ways, by combining a political stake in Sanaa with a powerful militia outside state control in the northern mountains, the al-Houthis are poised to play a role akin to Lebanon's Hezbollah. The al-Houthi's relationship with Iran, however, is far less overt and substantial than Hezbollah's, diminishing Tehran's ultimate sway within the group, at least in the short term.
Power is increasingly devolving away from Sanaa, carrying important consequences for the broader state and region. Regional movements such as the southern secessionists and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which see a weakened government that is preoccupied with events back in Sanaa and the collapse of security forces in the face of al-Houthi aggression, will be emboldened to reassert control in their own respective regions. In fact, according to independent newspaper al-Wasat, days after the al-Houthi occupation of Sanaa, the Southern Mobility Movement announced the establishment of a Southern Military Council for the purpose of seizing control of southern provinces and laying the foundations for the region's independence. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has also reportedly seized on paralysis in the capital to carry out a number of attacks on al-Houthi and state security forces in recent weeks. Regardless of how the fragmented Yemeni landscape becomes, it is clear the al-Houthi movement has catapulted itself into the national mainstream and is no longer just a regional sectarian rebel movement.
Read more: Zaidis Re-Emerge on Yemen's Political Scene | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook
-
Yemen's al-Houthi Rebels Seize a Strategic Port
Analysis
October 16, 2014 | 0430
Armed supporters of the al-Houthi movement gather against al Qaeda militants on Aug. 17. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)
Summary
Yemen's Zaidi al-Houthi rebels have gained control of the strategic Red Sea port city of al-Hudaydah, further strengthening their negotiating position in back-channel talks with the government of Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi. Seizing Yemen's second-largest port is a dramatic move intended to pressure Sanaa into making concessions on key points of disagreement between the government and the rebels. The move also signals that the al-Houthis still retain key levers with which to threaten Hadi's economic interests -- and legitimacy -- if the government continues to stall in reaching a political settlement.
It is likely that the fall of al-Hudaydah and the threat of further rebel aggression will force Hadi to accommodate al-Houthi demands. If he fails to do so, the rebels could respond with attempts to expand their territory or disrupt the country's vital oil industry.
Analysis
A number of local Yemeni news outlets reported Oct. 14 that several thousand al-Houthi militants had rapidly -- and facing seemingly little resistance -- established control over a majority of al-Hudaydah, Yemen's fourth-largest city. The al-Houthis and their allies now control (or are in the process of gaining control of) al-Hudaydah's port complex and international airport, as well as several administrative buildings, a local armory and a military base. The rebels have also established checkpoints and have begun conducting armed patrols throughout most of the city. Reports conflict as to whether al-Hudaydah Gov. Sakhr al-Wajeeh -- a former finance minister with reported links to Yemen's Muslim Brotherhood branch, the al-Islah party -- has submitted his resignation or is mediating between locals and al-Houthi commanders. Initial indications show that local security forces were ordered to stand down as the al-Houthis entered the city. Rumors that elements of Yemen's 10th Brigade, made up of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh's elite Republican Guard units, may have facilitated the takeover once again raise questions about Saleh's potential involvement in the conflict.
The Importance of al-Hudaydah
The port city of al-Hudaydah, once labeled by the World Bank as the "agro-industrial capital of Yemen," is a central node for Yemen's non-oil economy and handles the bulk of the country's total cargo imports. The city is an important transportation hub both domestically, with major highways running north and south along the coast and east to Sanaa, and internationally, with Red Sea shipping lanes. Al-Hudaydah is also surrounded by Yemen's most important agricultural region, the Tihama plain. Notably, reports indicate that the port city has long served as a critical smuggling hub for al-Islah leaders, particularly former Brig. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar. The al-Houthis have long perceived al-Islah, a party with Sunni tribal, Islamist and Salafist links, as their principal rival in northern Yemen.
Al-Hudaydah, Yemen
Click to Enlarge
Perhaps more important is the city's location a mere 40 kilometers (25 miles) south of the Ras Isa floating terminal, which exports oil produced in the vast Marib fields via the 435-kilometer Marib-Ras Isa pipeline. The pipeline transports between 70,000 and 110,000 barrels per day of the nation's average production of 125,000 barrels per day. Ras Isa and the nearby Saleef port complex have not yet fallen under al-Houthi control, but the threat of additional disruptions to an already troubled oil sector is certainly disconcerting for Yemeni leaders. With the country's oil revenues fluctuating wildly and the central bank severely strapped for cash, the al-Houthi occupation of such a critical economic hub would pose a serious threat to the government. It would also present an opportunity for the al-Houthis, who have long sought to control a major Red Sea port through which they could generate revenues and gain access to global transportation lanes.
Rebels' Motives and Next Steps
The al-Houthis are well aware of the panic their occupation of al-Hudaydah will cause in Sanaa, and they are likely expecting the move to spur progress in their negotiations with Hadi, as the al-Houthi occupation of Sanaa did. But since the Sept. 21 announcement of a U.N.-brokered cease-fire in the capital, Hadi has been slow to meet the demands of al-Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi. These demands include greater political representation, a larger share of the national wealth, restructuring proposed federalization boundaries and potentially incorporating Zaidi militants into state security forces. While the al-Houthis have managed to successfully install a neutral prime minister (over Hadi's objections), the decision took weeks of behind-the-scenes political jockeying.
As al-Houthi leaders look toward the next step in the movement's political re-emergence -- the formation of a new Cabinet in Sanaa -- the militants will seek to gain control of several ministries and access powerful deputy positions within key security, financial and energy posts. Doing so will enable the al-Houthis to manage the government from behind the scenes without being seen as the face of the new administration -- a role not unlike that of Lebanon's Hezbollah or Iraq's influential Shiite militias.
Yemen's Looming Water Crisis
Click to Enlarge
To achieve this goal, al-Houthi understands that he will need to strike at or threaten the regime's vulnerable points: the ports along the western coast and the oil fields in the country's center. By imposing a new military reality on the ground, the al-Houthi militants are hoping to avoid the deadlock they encountered with the prime ministerial selection process. In fact, there are rumors the group is preparing for a new offensive across the northwestern border of Marib province, home to a large share of Yemen's oil reserves. Meanwhile, militias aligned with the al-Houthis have begun to expand their security presence south of Sanaa in the mountainous Dhamar province, which lies at the southernmost tip of traditional Zaidi territory, occupying the provincial capital -- again reportedly with the help of Saleh-linked elements -- and forcing the governor to resign. Early reports also indicate that dozens of al-Houthi fighters seized the nearby city of Ibb on Oct. 15 and have begun advancing tentatively on Bayda and Taiz provinces.
Challenges Ahead
These strategies to gain leverage will increasingly draw the militants out of their traditional mountainous strongholds and into Sunni-majority territories. For example, the western coastline, though sparsely populated, is home to a Sunni Arab majority. The city of al-Hudaydah itself is overwhelmingly Sunni, and there are already reports of local resistance forming under the Tahami Movement, a Sunni organization based along Yemen's northwestern coast. Looking elsewhere, the al-Houthis risk encroaching on the heartland of the country's southern separatist movement by extending too far south of Dhamar province, into predominantly Sunni territory with a history of activity by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).
Likewise, if the al-Houthi militants attempt to seize the oil fields in eastern Marib province in Yemen's central interior, they would have to cross arid land that is home to some of Yemen's most notoriously territorial and fiercely autonomous Sunni tribes and an AQAP stronghold. In fact, Oct. 14 reports claim that tribesmen in Marib province have begun welcoming AQAP fighters from the nearby Hadramawt, Shabwa and Abyan provinces, perhaps seeking to bolster their defenses against a potential al-Houthi incursion. The risks of attacking these alternative targets likely contributed to al-Houthi's ultimate decision to target the coastline.
The Sectarian Divide in Northern Yemen
Click to Enlarge
Al-Houthi militants also face the danger of overextending their manpower and resources by expanding too far, too fast. The rebels are currently engaged in heavy fighting against al-Islah supporters and tribesmen in the northern al-Jawf province while simultaneously occupying Sanaa, a city of nearly 2 million people. Expanding too far beyond their current territory could also open up a new front against heavier concentrations of state military forces. Marib province alone is home to some three battalions -- an organized force larger than the force the militants encountered on the road to Sanaa. Meanwhile, AQAP has announced that it will begin targeting the Zaidi rebels more regularly; an Oct. 9 suicide bombing targeted an al-Houthi checkpoint in the capital and left more than 50 dead.
These challenges will likely constrain al-Houthi territorial ambitions for the time being, as their leaders focus on political negotiations and capitalize on the newfound leverage gained by the occupation of al-Hudaydah. Hadi cannot afford to let the Ras Isa export terminal, one of his country's most important economic lifelines, fall to the rebels. The president is also aware that the longer his government appears to be held hostage by the northern Zaidis, the further his credibility and legitimacy will decline and the more emboldened regional entities will become. The Southern Secessionist Movement already held demonstrations in Aden on Oct. 14, the 51st anniversary of southern Yemen's insurgency against British occupation. The demonstrations took place amid rumors that exiled southern leaders are beginning to return to the country to launch a new bid for independence, as well as reports of the secessionists demanding that all oil and natural gas firms halt exports immediately until they agree to operate under southern jurisdiction.
Hadi is likely to cave in the face of such overwhelming pressure, but the al-Houthis will be ready to respond should he choose to stand firm in negotiations. If the need arises, al-Houthi will likely choose to pursue the less risky option of asserting control south of the capital near Dhamar province and possibly in the crucial coastal port cities of Ras Isa and Saleef. The al-Houthis' ability to solidify their territorial control highlights their re-emergence in northern Yemen as a regional power broker and underscores Sanaa's rapidly declining ability to maintain its authority in the country's hinterlands.
Stratfor
-
http://pamelageller.com/2015/01/iran-backed-jihadists-in-yemen-complete-coup-us-embassy-fired-on.html/
-
http://pamelageller.com/2015/01/iran-backed-jihadists-in-yemen-complete-coup-us-embassy-fired-on.html/
Smart power!
-
Not sure how smart the WSJ's suggested solution is either, but FWIW here it is:
The Collapse of Yemen
The country could split into two radical Islamist safe havens.
Updated Jan. 20, 2015 7:43 p.m. ET
100 COMMENTS
It wasn’t long ago that President Obama touted Yemen as a success in the fight against terrorism. “This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us while supporting partners on the front lines is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years,” he said in a major speech in September, outlining his approach to defeating Islamic State. Within weeks of that pronouncement, the Iranian-backed Houthi militia occupied the capital city of San’a. Now matters are getting worse.
On Tuesday Houthi forces seized the presidential palace along with the headquarters of the presidential guard, taking dozens of hostages and seizing an arsenal of tanks and artillery. The country’s nominal president, the U.S.-backed Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, was last seen inside his residence; his fate wasn’t clear as we went to press. The U.S. Embassy in San’a reported that Houthi gunmen fired on one of its diplomatic vehicles, though nobody was injured.
A member of the Houthi militia stands on a street near the Presidential Palace, Sana'a, Yemen, 20 January 2015. ENLARGE
A member of the Houthi militia stands on a street near the Presidential Palace, Sana'a, Yemen, 20 January 2015. Photo: European Pressphoto Agency
This comes days after the West was brutally reminded in Paris that it cannot remain indifferent to chaos in a poor Arab country. At least one of the Kouachi brothers had weapons training in Yemen, and the Yemen-based branch of al Qaeda took credit for sponsoring the attack on the editorial offices of Charlie Hebdo. If the Houthi have now overthrown our partner government in Yemen, we’ll need either a new partner or a new strategy.
Opinion Journal Video
American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow John Bolton explains how Iranian-backed Houthi militants are seizing power in a key part of the Arabian Peninsula. Photo credit: Associated Press.
The Houthi are often described as a sect or a tribe. But it’s more accurate to say they are a radical Shiite political movement similar to Hezbollah, whose guiding slogan is “God is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse on the Jews, Victory to Islam.” Last year, the Houthi gained control of the Yemeni port city of Al Hudaydah, just north of the Bab El-Mandab strait separating the Red Sea from the Indian Ocean. Along with the Strait of Hormuz, this gives Iran the ability to threaten both maritime chokepoints surrounding the Arabian peninsula.
One temptation will be to see a silver lining in the Houthi takeover, on the theory that the Shiite group is at war with al Qaeda and its radical Sunni affiliates. But the “let Allah sort it out” approach to foreign policy espoused by Sarah Palin won’t work, given that neither side is likely to defeat the other and a de facto partition of the country into two radical camps would complicate and multiply the dangers. The Hadi government cooperated with U.S. forces targeting al Qaeda in Yemen, but the Houthi won’t do the same. We could face two terrorist havens.
What should the U.S. do? The Obama Administration should insist that the Houthi guarantee Mr. Hadi’s safety and release him if he’s in custody. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia may also need to coordinate a strategy to dislodge the Houthi from San’a. The collapse of Yemen is another reminder, along with Iraq, that counterterrorism-lite doesn’t work, and that the U.S. has to do more to prop up its allies, if necessary with troops on the ground.
If it can’t be reversed, the fall of Yemen takes the Mideast closer to a regional war between radical Sunnis and radical Shiites, with U.S. allies caught in the middle. It’s an illusion to think that if we withdraw the carnage will stay over there.
-
AirDrop coexist stickers ASAP!
-
Yemen Returns to Its Natural, Divided State
Geopolitical Diary
January 20, 2015 | 00:31 GMT Text Size Print
An ongoing rebel offensive in Yemen is, in many ways, a continuation of what the Arab state has seen since the establishment of a republican polity in 1962. The hyper-fragmentation of the country's political establishment since the ill-fated 2011 Arab Spring shows that the two decades that followed Yemeni unification in 1990 were an anomaly. Yemen has reverted to its natural state, in which different geographic, sectarian and ideological forces are locked in a "balance of weakness" preventing the country from existing as a coherent polity.
On Saturday, militiamen associated with the al-Houthi rebel movement — affiliated with the Zaidi sect of Shi'ism found in northern Yemen — allegedly kidnapped Ahmed Awad Bin Mubarak, the chief of staff to Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi. Mubarak, a technocrat who was reportedly rejected by the al-Houthis in 2014 as a candidate for prime minister because of his close links to Hadi, was due to present a draft of Yemen's new constitution to the president. The al-Houthis oppose the new charter, and it appears that the abduction took place to prevent it from moving forward.
The envisioned charter calls for the reorganization of Yemen into six administrative regions. Led by the charismatic Abdul-Malik al-Houthi and his tribesmen, the al-Houthis are calling instead for two such regions — northern and southern — which would enable the movement to consolidate its recent territorial gains in an area spanning from its northern strongholds to the capital, Sanaa, and even farther south.
What is a Geopolitical Diary? George Friedman Explains.
The core of the al-Houthi movement consists of a Zaidi tribal alliance led by the al-Houthi clan. Despite months of expansion from the movement's base in the northern Saada province, the limits of the al-Houthi's influence has been made obvious by the serious resistance from the Yemeni military it is facing in Marib, Ibb and Bayda provinces. The al-Houthis themselves can go only so far in pushing southward. The al-Houthis are also well aware that Yemen's southern separatists — with whom they would ultimately like to share power — have been weakened by internal differences and the presence of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in the south.
Thus, the movement is not seeking to replace the Yemeni military-dominated political order established by former President Ali Abdullah Saleh — a dynamic that is struggling to persevere under the leadership of Saleh's successor, Hadi. Instead, the al-Houthis are aiming to become the kingmakers in a new power-sharing system divided into the northern and southern administrative regions, in which the movement and the southern separatists would have the majority of power, with establishment factions as junior stakeholders. The al-Houthis are willing to allow the old guard led by Hadi to maintain some semblance of a central government in Sanaa — at least until the movement can further solidify its position and the southerners are able to gain ground in their own region.
Certainly the al-Houthis have emerged as the largest political force in the country, but they remain locked in a balance of weakness involving the old order, anti-Houthi tribes, al Qaeda and the southern separatists. It is unlikely that the al-Houthis will be able to break out from this constrained order anytime soon. But considering the broader geo-sectarian struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran (in which Yemen has become a key battleground) and the sheer number of camps and competing factions within the two main Yemeni separatist movements, Yemen over the long haul will not be able to exist as a nation-state in the classical sense of the term.
The Yemeni condition represents the broad general trend within the Arab world that remains in the throes of autocratic meltdown, as seen in Libya and Syria. The states that remain standing — namely Saudi Arabia and Egypt — face similar challenges of how to maintain their dominions in such an anarchic environment.
Read more: Yemen Returns to Its Natural, Divided State | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook
-
Yemen Enters a More Chaotic Time
Analysis
February 11, 2015 | 22:05 GMT
Print
Text Size
Al-Houthi fighters ride in the back of a vehicle in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa on Feb. 11. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)
Analysis
The U.S. Embassy in Sanaa closed Feb. 11 after the few remaining staff members and the company of U.S. Marines guarding the embassy compound traveled to the airport to leave the country. The withdrawal of the U.S. diplomatic presence comes after the al-Houthi militia dissolved parliament Feb. 6 and announced the establishment of a five-member presidential council and a 551-member transitional national council to replace the government. The diplomatic decision also comes as the factions fighting for control of the country are threatening to become more violent than in past Yemeni conflicts.
Though the U.S. government's explanation for the embassy closure listed uncertainty of the security situation, the embassy has stayed open in times when security in Sanaa was far worse, such as in 2011 when the military units loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh were fighting military units loyal to defected Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar for control of the capital. This fact, and a careful reading of the U.S. government statement, makes it clear that the decision to withdraw was more politically driven than security driven. The U.S. government does not recognize the al-Houthis as the legitimate government of Yemen and therefore does not have an entity with which to conduct diplomacy. Such a move is clearly intended to pressure the al-Houthis to back down, and now that the U.S. Embassy has withdrawn, we can anticipate European embassies to follow, as the British and the French have done.
The road ahead for Yemen is unclear. While U.N. and international efforts to find an inclusive solution for Yemen's political problems continue, it does not appear that such a solution can be reached without a military imposition of unity — essentially conquering the various factions and forcing them to join the process. The al-Houthis have made some significant military headway in Bayda province in recent days, and they appear to be preparing a major military offensive to expand their control in Marib province and take control of the energy fields there.
Meanwhile, the secessionist Southern Movement and many factions of the reformist al-Islah coalition have rejected the al-Houthi announcement. A coalition of tribal leaders in Marib has also pledged to oppose the al-Houthis, even floating the idea of declaring independence from the rest of Yemen. There are also reports that the Saudis are supporting the conservative tribes in Marib. These tribes are closely linked to jihadists in Yemen, including al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). They fought alongside Saleh's government in several past wars against the al-Houthis, and Saleh used these tribal militias and jihadists against the Southern Movement in the Yemeni civil war.
It appears, however, that there may be a conflict between U.S. and Saudi interests in Yemen. Saudi support for the conservative tribes conflicts with the United States' view that AQAP is the primary threat in Yemen. While the United States is not supporting the al-Houthis, a strong and rapid al-Houthi military push that would weaken the conservative tribes will also weaken the jihadist group. Conversely, a prolonged period of conflict between the tribes and the al-Houthis could again permit AQAP to strengthen, as it did amid the chaos of 2011. However, a nascent challenge to AQAP by the Islamic State is dividing, and may weaken, the jihadists if it is able to grow. Indeed, reports came out Feb. 11 that a group of AQAP militants renounced its loyalty to leader Ayman al-Zawahiri and pledged its support to the Islamic State.
Yemen has long been a troubled country wracked by violence, civil war and political infighting. But these developments may be taking the county from the normal level of chaos it has experienced over the past few years and pushing it toward an even more violent and chaotic time.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/11/middleeast/yemen-unrest/#
:-P :-P :-P :x :x :x
-
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/25/us-yemen-security-special-forces-idUSKBN0LT0B120150225?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=*Mideast%20Brief&utm_campaign=2014_The%20Middle%20East%20Daily_2.25.15
-
:cry: :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-loses-sight-of-500-million-in-counterterrorism-aid-given-to-yemen/2015/03/17/f4ca25ce-cbf9-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html
-
http://pamelageller.com/2015/03/backed-rebels-in-yemen-loot-secret-u-s-files-about-spy-operations.html/
-
The beginning? On April 6, Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren confirmed that the U.S. has agreed to begin performing aerial refueling of Saudi and allied bombers hitting targets in Yemen, with the caveat that American tankers won’t gas up over Yemeni airspace.
"Aerial refueling has been approved but has not yet been conducted," he told reporters at the Pentagon. "It’s been authorized, assets are in place. The Saudis have not requested it. Any refueling will not take place over Yemen. Any refueling will take place over Saudi Arabia or other places."
-
BEIRUT, Lebanon — After they routed the army in southern Yemen, fighters from Al Qaeda stormed into the city of Al Mukalla, seizing government buildings, releasing jihadists from prison and stealing millions of dollars from the central bank.
Then they surprised everyone. Instead of raising their flags and imposing Islamic law, they passed control to a civilian council and gave it a budget to pay salaries, import fuel and hire teams to clean up garbage. The fighters receded into the background, maintaining only a single police station to arbitrate disputes.
Al Qaeda’s takeover of Yemen’s fifth-largest city in April was the most direct indication yet that the group’s most potent regional affiliates are evolving after years of American drone strikes killing their leaders and changing to meet the challenge posed by the Islamic State’s competing and land-grabbing model of jihad.
While the image of Al Qaeda has long been one of shadowy operatives plotting international attacks from remote hide-outs, its branches in Yemen and Syria are now increasingly making common cause with local groups on the battlefield.
In doing so, they are distancing themselves from one of Osama bin Laden’s central precepts: That fighters should focus on the “far enemy” in the West and not get bogged down in local insurgencies.
In recent weeks, the Qaeda affiliate in Yemen has allied with armed tribes to fight Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, putting that alliance on the same side of the country’s civil war as the United States and Saudi Arabia. In Syria, Qaeda-allied fighters are important members of a rebel coalition against President Bashar al-Assad that includes groups supported by the West.
This strategy has clear benefits for a group that has long been near the top of the United States’s list of enemies by allowing it to build local support while providing some cover against the threat of foreign military action.
But despite Al Qaeda’s increased involvement in local battles, American officials say the group remains committed to attacking the West, a goal that could be easier to plot from sanctuaries where it enjoys local support.
Cooperating with others could also give Al Qaeda a long-term advantage in its competition with the extremists of the Islamic State, analysts said.
Since its public break with Al Qaeda last year, the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, has stolen the jihadist limelight by seizing cities in Syria and Iraq and declaring a caliphate in the territory it controls. This has won it the allegiances of other militant cells from Libya to Afghanistan.
The Islamic State has insisted that other groups join it or be considered enemies, a tactic that has alienated many in areas it controls. And its public celebration of violence, including the beheading of Western hostages, helped spur the formation of a United States-led military coalition that is bombing the group.
Al Qaeda’s branches in Syria and Yemen have taken a different route, building ties with local groups and refraining from the strict application of Shariah, the legal code of Islam, when faced with local resistance, according to residents of areas where Al Qaeda holds sway.
When Al Qaeda took over Al Mukalla in April, it seized government buildings and used trucks to cart off more than $120 million from the central bank, according to the bank’s director, Abdul-Qader Foulihan. That sum could not be independently verified.
But it soon passed control to a civilian council, giving it a budget of more than $4 million to provide services, an arrangement that made sense to local officials seeking to serve their people during wartime.
“We are not Qaeda stooges,” said Abdul-Hakeem bin Mahfood, the council’s secretary general, in a telephone interview. “We formed the council to avoid the destruction of the city.”
While the council pays salaries and distributes fuel, Al Qaeda maintains a police station to settle disputes, residents said. It has so far made no effort to ban smoking or regulate how women dress.
Nor has it called itself Al Qaeda, instead using the name the Sons of Hadhramaut to emphasize its ties to the surrounding province.
One self-described Qaeda member said that the choice of name was deliberate, recalling that after the group seized territory in southern Yemen in 2011, the country’s military had mobilized to push it out with support from the United States.
“We were in control for a year and six months, we applied God’s law, we created a small state and the whole world saw it, but they did not leave us alone,” the man said in an interview with a Yemeni television station. “So we came here with the name the Sons of Hadhramaut, but the people here know who we are.”
American officials have long considered the terrorist group’s Yemeni branch, known as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the most dangerous to the West. It has sought to carry out attacks against the United States, and it retains sophisticated bomb-making expertise.
Now, Yemen’s civil war has given the group an opportunity to expand, analysts said.
After Houthi rebels seized the Yemeni capital and forced the president into exile, Saudi Arabia began leading a bombing campaign aimed at pushing the Houthis back. With all that going on, no one has tried to dislodge Al Qaeda from Al Mukalla, although American drone strikes have killed top Qaeda leaders nearby.
April Longley Alley, a Yemen analyst with the International Crisis Group, said there was reason to worry that the close ties between Qaeda fighters and other armed elements meant that any foreign military support given to fight the Houthis could eventually end up in Al Qaeda’s hands.
“It is very likely that if the war continues, we’ll see a dynamic like we have seen in other parts of the region, where money and arms given to an opposition movement bleed out to other groups,” she said.
An American intelligence official said that Al Qaeda’s senior leadership had suffered losses in recent years, diminishing its importance and giving greater autonomy to the affiliates, some of which still pursue attacks on the United States and its allies.
While Qaeda networks in South Asia and North Africa have struggled to recover from the losses of leaders, resources and territory, Yemeni and Syrian branches have “gained momentum and, in some cases, more resources due to ongoing instability,” the official said, on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to journalists.
Syria’s Qaeda affiliate, the Nusra Front, has made itself an essential component of the rebel forces seeking to oust Mr. Assad. It recently joined a rebel coalition called the Army of Conquest, putting itself in the same trenches as groups that receive support from the West.
“They are Muslims, no different from us,” said Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, the Nusra Front’s leader, in a recent interview with Al Jazeera.
He also said his group had been ordered by Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s global leader, not to carry out foreign attacks that could disrupt the fight against Mr. Assad.
American officials called that propaganda, and the United States has bombed Nusra bases, saying it is targeting operatives focused on attacking the West. But the strikes have been criticized by other rebels, reflecting the Nusra Front’s importance to the rebel cause.
The group has worked to strengthen those ties to bolster its might against the government and the Islamic State, according to a Nusra Front coordinator based in northern Syria.
Such cooperation also allows the group to benefit from arms given to other rebels.
“The mujahedeen need sophisticated weapons, and the West provides these weapons to whomever it thinks is able to carry out its agenda,” said the coordinator, who goes by the name Abu Omar al-Muhajir and was interviewed via text message.
Civilians living in Nusra Front areas, too, say the group has built local support, refraining from imposing Shariah when residents resisted.
Meanwhile, its fighters have distributed food and fixed plumbing systems. In the village of Binnish, it recently fielded a team in a friendly soccer match against another rebel group. Nusra’s team wore fatigues in line with Islamic modesty, and it lost against players wearing shorts.
“Nusra are not extremists,” said an activist who attended the game and gave only his first name, Najid. “They distribute leaflets at checkpoints and call people to the religion.”
Others worry that the group is merely laying the groundwork to eventually impose its will.
“I am worried that after all the gains the Nusra Front has made in the past four months and the notable increase in popular support, locals will tolerate and accept the Nusra Front’s way of governing the liberated areas,” said Hasan al-Ahmed, an activist in the town of Kafr Nubul.
-
Analysis
Aug. 11
Anti-Houthi forces supported by the Saudi-led coalition have built up significant momentum in Yemen. To the south, Southern Resistance fighters have renewed their efforts after capturing Aden, pushing north and northeast from the port city. Greatly assisted by an influx of combat power, including Saudi-operated armored units, they captured Lahj and al-Anad air base last week and are advancing. The Southern Resistance recently liberated the city of Zinjibar, a major gain that allows them to push farther into Abyan governorate where they intend to link up with friendly forces locked in battle with Houthi- and Saleh-aligned elements near Lawder.
The Houthis, along with forces loyal to former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, are in an increasingly precarious position after the liberation of several localities in the Ibb and Dhamar regions. This has led them to dig in and fortify some of their stronger urban positions, namely the cities of Taiz and Ibb. The Southern Resistance has given Houthi defenders in Ibb — 46 kilometers (28 miles) northeast of Taiz — 48 hours to withdraw from the city. Despite their impetus to drive on, rebel forces are reluctant to simply push into population centers, in part because of the risk of inflicting collateral damage and in part because of the perils of clearing well-defended urban terrain.
Yemen's capital, Sanaa, remains firmly under Houthi and Saleh control for now, but coalition-supported forces have closed to within 100 kilometers (60 miles) of the city. As well as encroaching from Dhamar governorate to the south, coalition-backed Yemeni fighters are massed in Marib, 120 kilometers (75 miles) east of Sanaa, having moved in from Saudi Arabia via the al-Wadiya border crossing earlier this month. Before moving on the capital, coalition-backed forces are likely to neutralize the surrounding area first, defeating Houthi and Saleh elements in the key popular centers of Taiz, Ibb and Dhamar city.
The civilian population in Sanaa is largely anti-Saudi, which could complicate efforts to seize the city. Significant protests are common against the Saudi-supported operation to pacify Yemen and against naval blockades that are preventing an influx of essential goods. A number of tribal groups have sided with the anti-Houthi movement, helping to accelerate the pace of operations in places such as Ibb. This boost and Saudi armored, air and logistic support mean that rapid gains are likely to continue, especially in less urbanized areas.
Aug. 6
Media reports citing Yemeni military sources indicate that dozens of tanks, armored vehicles and personnel carriers accompanied by hundreds of Saudi-trained Yemeni troops entered Yemen overnight from Saudi Arabia via the al-Wadiya border crossing.
If confirmed, this development is significant. Stratfor has long anticipated a push by coalition ground forces toward Sanaa through Marib. The terrain along this route is favorable, making a push through it more viable than one toward Sanaa south through Sadaa or north from Aden and Lahj. The highway network in Yemen, specifically S150 and N5, permits movement and resupply from Saudi Arabia. The terrain from the al-Wadiya border crossing to Marib also allows armored units room to maneuver — especially with air support.
Once coalition forces reach Marib, however, the terrain becomes more challenging. The landscape becomes rugged in the 153-kilometer (95-mile) corridor along highway N5 between Marib and Sanaa. The terrain along highway 515, the equally long southern route from Marib to Sanaa, is even more rugged and restrictive.
By pressing on Sanaa from the east, the coalition would force the Houthis and allied supporters of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh into a two-front war, a position further complicated by the Houthi need to maintain forces in the north to protect the movement's heartland in Sadaa from a Saudi thrust from the north. If the coalition could seize control of the capital, Sanaa, it would be an important symbolic victory. It would also deprive the Houthis of significant resources from taxes and black market fuel sales. Taking Sanaa might also flush Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh and other senior opposition leaders out of hiding.
Elsewhere reports have emerged that Yemeni opposition forces launched an attack against Saudi forces in Najran. As coalition and southern resistance forces have pushed rebel forces out of the Aden area, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has also allegedly seized three new towns near Aden. In Abha, a town in southwest Saudi Arabia close to the Yemeni border, a suicide bomber attacked a Salafist mosque used by a Saudi state security unit known as the Special Emergency Force. The bomber, who was reportedly disguised as a janitor, killed 13 people, including 10 members of the unit.
There has been no confirmed claim of responsibility yet, although a claim purportedly from the Islamic State is circulating on Twitter. The target and location of the attack mean that it could have been the work of either the Houthis or the Islamic State. The Islamic State's Wilayat al-Najd affiliate group has attacked Shiite mosques in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province in recent months. This was a similar soft target and apparently not as well protected as Shiite mosques, but to date the Islamic State has not attacked Salafist mosques in Saudi Arabia. If it is confirmed that the Islamic State was responsible, it will broaden the scope of the threat it poses to Saudi Arabia.
Aug. 3
A large force of Southern Resistance fighters backed by Saudi-led coalition armored fighting vehicles have reportedly seized control of al-Anad air base, located north of the city of Lahj. The deployment of 3,000 ground troops — 1,500 Saudi and Emirati personnel and 1,500 trained Yemenis — with main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles is a notable escalation in the Saudi-led coalition's involvement in Yemen. It is also a sign that Riyadh is willing to take additional casualties.
As the tide of war in Aden began to shift toward the Hadi-aligned Southern Resistance in previous weeks, Riyadh exploited the opportunity to begin moving heavier equipment into the port of Aden. An influx of light armored vehicles greatly assisted the anti-Houthi movement in retaking the city. With the Aden Peninsula coming back under Hadi control, the Saudi-led coalition has deployed significant numbers of men and materiel by ship. The added complexity and logistic burden imposed by forward mounting an armored force left Riyadh with little choice but to deploy its own personnel to use the equipment. This is a significant commitment to the campaign, but a necessary one. To operate a large-scale armored formation requires a high level of training, expertise and support, beyond what the Yemeni resistance forces alone could muster.
Al-Anad is the first objective for the Saudi-backed fighting force. It is the largest air base in Yemen, and formerly the home of U.S. forces engaged in counterterrorism operations against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. The United States withdrew its forces from the base in March 2015 when it came under attack from Houthi militants backed by remnants of the Yemeni armed forces loyal to former president Ali Abdullah Saleh. The Houthi thrust was an attempt to dislodge forces in al-Anad that were loyal to Yemen's internationally recognized government, led by President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi.
Since then, the base has changed hands several times. It has also been severely damaged during the fighting, and its arms storage facilities have been heavily looted. Situated approximately 48 kilometers (30 miles) north of Aden, al-Anad lies near the southern limit of the Houthis' military expansion and far from the group's northern power base. The facility is also at the confluence of Aden's coastal plain and the southern portion of Yemen's mountainous backbone. The southern approach is favorable terrain for coalition armor. Backed by air power, Saudi tanks and fighting vehicles have ample space to maneuver, creating a problem for the Houthi defenders.
However, the terrain just north of al-Anad tells a different story. It is very mountainous, with limited routes along which armor can move. This will provide Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces with a defensive advantage, more so than they had in Aden or Lahj. The heavily channeled terrain provides ample opportunities for mines and improvised explosive devices and offers positions for anti-armor ambushes. The defenders will also be able to shell the base and its approaches from elevated positions in the mountains. Additionally, the fact that the Saudis have bombed several bridges on important highways — part of the Saudi air campaign meant to cut Houthi supply lines running from the group's stronghold in northern Yemen to the south — will now actually hinder mobility for the coalition forces themselves through the mountain passes.
At this point, the coalition clearly has the upper hand in the area surrounding Aden. They have been able to reopen the port and the airport in Aden, establishing essential air and sea bridges to move personnel, supplies and equipment. The coalition will also likely attempt use al-Anad as a supply hub once the airfield there is secured. Still, their airlift capability is limited compared to what they can bring in via the port. The Saudi-led coalition undoubtedly has superior logistics, firepower and manpower, and has amassed an impressive modern fighting force. However, the farther the coalition moves from this beachhead into the hostile terrain of Yemen's mountains, the more exposed they will be to ambushes and counterattacks. Saudi forces took heavy losses in the 2009 war with Yemen, when Riyadh's offensive operations against the Houthis were staged in the mountains of northern Yemen.
Despite months of fighting against forces loyal to Hadi, the southern movement, and tribal forces backed by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the Houthis are still far better armed than they were in 2009, thanks to the vast quantities of military ordnance they successfully looted from government stockpiles over the past year. Dislodging them from their mountain strongholds will be a formidable undertaking, but the coalition forces are beginning to show their commitment. Still, the true motivation behind Riyadh's latest actions in Yemen remains to be seen. It could be either the beginning of a sustained effort to totally defeat the Houthi- and Saleh-aligned forces on the battlefield, or an effort to ratchet up pressure to force a political settlement that would end the conflict.
Yemeni rebel leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi said in an Aug. 2 speech that a political settlement with the country’s exiled government was still possible, despite the ouster of the Iran-backed rebels by their Saudi-backed counterparts from the port city of Aden. The Houthis would welcome any mediation effort by a neutral party, whether Arab or international, he said. Meanwhile, the prime minister of Yemen’s exiled government, Khaled Bahah, arrived Aug. 2 in Aden, nearly two weeks after his forces retook the city.
July 29
A car rigged with explosives detonated outside the al-Fayd al-Hatimi mosque in eastern Sanaa, killing three people. The local Islamic State affiliate, Wilayat Sanaa, claimed responsibility for the attack and said it was retaliation for Ismaili support of the Houth rebels, according to messages posted on Twitter. Meanwhile, the internationally recognized Yemeni government said it will incorporate the anti-Houthi Popular Resistance militiamen into the army.
July 28
A humanitarian truce in Yemen failed to take hold as Saudi-led airstrikes resumed July 28 against Houthi rebels who continued to fight with loyalists. The truce was implemented just a day earlier and was scheduled to last five days to enable aid workers to deliver humanitarian relief to the country. Airstrikes targeted Houthi positions north of Aden, the port city recaptured by anti-Houthi forces last week, and also struck rebel positions in Lahj province.
July 27
Saudi forces retaliated against Houthi rebel shelling of a border region in Yemen. No additional details were provided about the incident, which comes just hours after another "humanitarian cease-fire" between rebels and Saudi-backed forces in Yemen was scheduled to begin. Additionally, Saudi-led coalition jets mistakenly hit positions held by pro-government forces in Lahj province in southern Yemen
July 26
Yemeni forces allied with the Saudi-led coalition fought Houthi militia for control of the al-Anad air base July 26, local residents said. The fighting for Yemen's largest air base north of Aden comes hours before a five-day cease-fire is supposed to take effect to allow for the delivery of humanitarian aid. But the truce, which the Arab coalition announced July 25, was cast into doubt when Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi was reported to have rejected it, arguing it would only benefit the Islamic State and al Qaeda.
July 25
The Saudi-led coalition in Yemen called a five-day humanitarian truce that will begin midnight, the Saudi Press Agency reported. The coalition specified it would respond if Houthi rebels violate the cease-fire.
July 24
Representatives of former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh have been meeting with diplomats from the United States, the United Arab Emirates and Britain, the leader of Saleh’s Congress party said July 24. The negotiations are taking place in Cairo and are aimed at finding a solution to the conflict in Yemen, he said. An official statement from the Congress party later denied any meetings. Western diplomats contacted by Reuters downplayed the meetings, saying they are part of regular discussions with Yemeni officials.
July 23
Houthi forces fired rockets at Aden's airport July 23, one day after the facility reopened. Three of the rockets landed near the runway, where a Saudi cargo plane carrying 20 tons of humanitarian aid was parked. Aden's airport has been closed for the duration of the four-month conflict in Yemen, but it reopened after Saudi airstrikes helped forces loyal to exiled President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi gain control of most of Aden.
July 22
A Saudi military plane landed in the Aden airport, the first since anti-Houthi forces seized the airport from Houthi rebels. Planes carrying unspecified relief supplies are expected to land in the next two days.
July 21
A car bombing claimed by the Islamic State killed four in rebel-controlled Sanaa. Another eight people, including several children, were wounded in the attack. Sunni extremists have carried out attacks against Shiite targets in Yemen since March. According to unnamed sources, another 11 Houthi fighters were killed in separate attacks overnight.
July 17
After months of intense fighting, the battle for Aden appears to be over. Advancing from the direction of the airport and through the Khormaksar district into the neck of the peninsula, Southern Resistance forces made good use of their new armored capability, liberating the Crater district from the Houthis and capturing key rebel leaders in the process. The Southern Resistance armored thrust then continued through the Maala port district and on to Tawahi. Rather than die in place, many Houthi fighters have surrendered. The isolated pockets of resistance that do remain are in tactically untenable positions and will likely not hold out long. The city of Aden is for all intents and purposes under Southern Resistance control.
Some Houthi forces were able to escape the final push and are headed northeast, where reports suggest they intend to regroup in Abyan governorate. One of the instrumental factors in Aden's fall to the Southern Resistance was the surrender of the 39th Armored Brigade, which was loyal to former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Losing the brigade, stationed at the military base at the airport, was a major blow for the lingering Houthi fighters in Aden.
Keen to exploit the fledgling victory, Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi immediately dispatched government and security officials to the city. Hadi seeks to rapidly reestablish as least a perception of political control over the peninsula. However, beyond the current pragmatic cooperation between military forces loyal to Hadi and the Southern Resistance militia, these parties are not politically aligned. Hadi is the internationally recognized president of Yemen but the Southern Resistance is the strongest physical element on the ground. Without a common and present enemy threat to act as a unifier, conflict over the political control of areas liberated from Houthi fighters is a disquieting possibility.
Both sides will attempt to limit such a conflict from emerging until their mutual interest in combating Houthi and Saleh forces results in some kind of resolution. At the same time, the success in Aden gives reason for Hadi and the Southern Resistance to pursue military action over negotiations, mainly because of the prospect of continued military success in the near future.
July 14
The U.N.-brokered cease-fire that was supposed to bring a temporary halt to fighting in Yemen over Ramadan failed before it even started. Supposedly taking effect midnight on July 10, the humanitarian truce was largely ignored by forces on the ground — fighting continued through the weekend. Forces loyal to Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi claim they were not ordered to commit to the cessation of hostilities, though disrupted communications may have been partially responsible. Rumors suggest that new negotiations are being prepared but only if former Yemeni Prime Minister Khaled Bahah replaces Hadi as president. At the moment this remains an outside possibility. Even with serious negotiations or a more durable cease-fire underway, it is highly likely Yemen will simply move into another phase of conflict rather than achieve a peaceful resolution.
Saudi-led airstrikes against Houthi positions resumed July 13, killing at least 21 civilians and wounding 45 others in Sanaa, witnesses and medics said. Because of the paucity of Houthi targets outside of population centers, Saudi air power has been increasingly striking closer to populated areas, incurring higher levels of collateral damage as a result. Airstrikes also hit the Houthi stronghold of Saada in northern Yemen.
The Battle for Aden
Meanwhile, in Aden, Southern Resistance fighters made significant gains July 14, recapturing the port city's contested airport and an adjacent military base from Houthi rebels. The fighters were aided by Saudi combat aircraft and have continued to push farther south into Aden's Khormaksar district. Houthi opposition to the Southern Resistance is now reportedly weak, with many rebels surrendering or withdrawing from the city. Unconfirmed reports indicate that Republican Guard forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh removed their support for the Houthis in Aden, leaving them to deal with the Southern Resistance offensive alone.
A further boon to anti-Houthi forces in Yemen arrived in the form of a large delivery of modern armored vehicles, likely from Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates. These protected mobility vehicles were used extensively in July 14 operations in Aden. In addition to improving the Southern Resistance's overall mobility, the RPG-protected vehicles can deliver personnel close to the fighting and provide intimate fire support from onboard heavy weapons. This improved capability, combined with the weakened position of the remaining Houthis in Aden, has significantly tipped the balance of power in favor of the Southern Resistance. Based on recent developments, the battle for Aden could be in its final stages. Following an anti-Houthi victory in Aden, Southern Resistance forces will likely be redirected toward the battle fronts in Lahj, Taiz and Abyan, where Houthi rebels have also faced severe resistance but have as yet remained unbroken.
July 10
An unnamed Saudi official said that the U.N.-backed humanitarian pause in the conflict in Yemen will be "useless" because Houthi rebels do not have full control of their forces. During a five-day truce in May, the Saudi-led coalition accused the Houthis of violating the terms.
Analysis: Following continued attempts by U.N. representatives to establish a cease-fire during Ramadan, Yemen's belligerents have finally reached an agreement. That the cease-fire is being enacted without a withdrawal of Houthi forces, something previously demanded by the government of President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, indicates the minimal impact this cease-fire will have on a resolution of this conflict in the long term and Hadi's limited ability to force the issue with the Houthis despite the Saudi intervention. Read the full analysis here: Yemen's Cease-Fire Will Not Bring Permanent Peace.
July 9
The United Nations envoy to Yemen, Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, announced a humanitarian pause in the Yemen conflict set to begin July 10. The temporary truce will last through the end of Ramadan on July 17, allowing civilians in the country to receive humanitarian aid. Despite the announcement of the truce, warring factions in Yemen have so far failed to reach a permanent resolution to the conflict. The envoy held talks with officials from both the exiled government and Houthi rebel leaders in Sanaa.
July 7
An estimated 176 fighters and civilians were killed in airstrikes and clashes in Yemen on July 6, local residents and pro-Houthi media said July 7. This would make it the deadliest day in Yemen since the Arab coalition bombing campaign began in late March. Given the unwillingness of any side in the Yemen conflict to accept a compromise in negotiations, fighting continues across the troubled nation.
July 6
Yemen's internationally recognized government has said it expects to reach a deal on a cease-fire soon. Meanwhile, the Yemeni government staged more airstrikes in Sanaa. Thousands have been killed in airstrikes since March, and aid organizations have largely been unable to deliver supplies to the country. U.N.-brokered peace talks have been tumultuous.
July 4
Yemen's Houthi rebels said July 4 that they are in discussions with the United Nations about a humanitarian pause to fighting until the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The cessation of fighting would allow deliveries of much-needed humanitarian aid in the embattled country. On July 2, the U.S. State Department called for a humanitarian pause to the conflict to allow aid groups to deliver food, fuel and medicine.
June 25
A U.S. drone strike killed four suspected Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula militants in southeast Yemen. The attack targeted a camp in militant-controlled Mukalla.
June 22
Negotiations between the major belligerents in the Yemen conflict have officially ended in Geneva. Representatives from the government of Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, Houthi militias and forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh parted ways with little to show for their time. The failure to reach an agreement was expected, given the unwillingness of any side to accept compromise in any form.
As a result, fighting continues throughout Yemen. The overall situation on the ground has continued to shift by small increments, but no significant gains have materialized on either side of the conflict, despite the best efforts of the Saudi-led air campaign, which continues at full strength.
Houthi fighters and former military personnel loyal to Saleh have exerted direct pressure on Saudi Arabia by carrying out cross-border raids, a major concern for Riyadh at a time when it needs to foster public support for military operations in Yemen. Several military positions in the Saudi provinces of Jazan and Najran were targeted over the weekend. In one particular attack near Abu Arradeef in Jazan province, Saleh loyalists managed to take control of a Saudi military base after a sustained bombardment from multiple launch rocket systems.
In Yemen, the Southern Resistance remains effective against Houthi forces in the city of Taiz, though the anti-Houthi group's most notable successes since the end of last week occurred north of Aden. After weeks of consistent but limited gains on the northern outskirts of Aden, Southern Resistance fighters finally reached the suburbs of Lahj, which are still under Houthi control. Lahj is the main Houthi anchor position between the port city of Aden itself and the Southern Resistance-controlled al-Anad air base to the north of it.
With the onset of Ramadan, Southern Resistance fighters revealed their intent to consolidate the liberation of Ad Dali and Aden governorates by the feast of Eid, which occurs at the end of the traditional Muslim period of fasting. Beyond wanting to secure its immediate gains, the Southern Resistance may have a more pressing motive. The group is allegedly receiving more Yemeni personnel with valuable foreign training to assist it in its attempts to recapture Aden. However, claims that the Southern Resistance is facing difficulties in paying its fighters casts some doubt over its ability to maintain its offensive operations.
June 20
A vehicle bomb detonated at Sanaa's Qubbat al-Mahdi mosque in the Old Town area of the city June 20, killing three and injuring an unspecified number of others. Islamic State bombed Houthi rebel political headquarters and two mosques June 17. Peace talks between the Houthis and representatives of President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi ended without a deal June 19.
Analysis: The Islamic State launched multiple suicide bombings in Sanaa aimed at Houthi rebels' political headquarters and two mosques June 17, the eve of Ramadan. According to the Yemeni Health Ministry, the attacks killed at least four people and wounded at least 50 more.
It was the Islamic State's fourth attack against mosques in Sanaa. The first and most deadly occurred March 20, when suicide bombers killed over 140 people in the bombing of two mosques during midday Friday prayers. Because al Qaeda has eschewed assaults on places of worship, the attack was unexpected and Islamic State suicide bombers were able to easily sneak into the mosques. Read the full analysis: The Islamic State's Pretense of Strength in Yemen.
June 18
A fistfight erupted on the sidelines of U.N.-mediated peace talks between Yemen's warring factions in Geneva. Yemeni opponents of the Houthi rebels that drove the government out of Sanaa interrupted a news conference held by Houthi officials, throwing shoes and shouting insults at them. Fights then broke out between Houthis and protesters, who were escorted out. Participants in the negotiations, scheduled to wrap up either June 19 or June 20, have reported little progress in the talks. Hamza al-Houthi, head of the Houthi delegation, stayed composed during the confusion.
June 12
In the battle for Yemen, forces opposed to the Houthi rebels appear to have the upper hand, at least for now. Indeed, over the past week, anti-Houthi fighters have made consistent, albeit limited, territorial gains against the rebels and against forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
In Aden, anti-Houthi forces expanded their territory in the northern and western outskirts of the city. Meanwhile, they have taken ground in the fight near the airport in Aden. In Dali province, the general appointed by President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi to lead the contingent of the 33rd Brigade that is still loyal to the government (most of it is not) has refilled his ranks by gathering former military officers. He has also recruited Southern Resistance fighters, who also oppose the Houthis and who have claimed some recent success of their own in Dali. Elsewhere, the counteroffensive against the Houthis in Marib city has proved effective, and the rebels' attempts to enter the city appear unrealistic.
All these gains were made in no small part because of the Saudi-led air campaign, which has degraded the capabilities of the Houthis and Saleh loyalists. But that air campaign is becoming more controversial as it causes more collateral damage. In fact, the campaign came under fire after it destroyed parts of the old city in the center of Aden — a protected World Heritage site. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has been unable to quell Houthi activity along its border with Yemen — attacks against military outposts and shelling into Saudi territory continue unabated.
Delegations from the different sides of the conflict have arrived in Geneva to discuss the conflict. The official talks begin June 14, but preliminary talks involving a smaller number of delegates will begin June 12. But because the Hadi delegation continues to insist on a Security Council resolution — something that would require the unconditional disarmament and withdrawal of Houthi forces — the talks will probably not bear much fruit.
June 2
The tide of battle in Yemen appears to be turning in favor of the anti-Houthi movement. After a long period of stagnation, Houthi elements and supporters of former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh are being gradually pushed back from a number of active frontlines. Though gains are taking time to materialize, progress is being made in places such as Marib, Taiz and Dali. Anti-Houthi forces pushed beyond the city limits of Dali proper, advancing in the direction of Ibb. This is problematic for Saleh, who was compelled to move fighters from Ibb to the city of Taiz, which remains split between Houthi forces and those opposing them.
The alleged success of anti-Houthi forces in Marib is notable because the Houthis had claimed to be diverting efforts to the eastern fronts, following offers of support from sympathetic tribesmen and after becoming gridlocked in the south. In Aden, Houthi offensives have been continually blunted against the opposition, which managed to recapture terrain on the outskirts of the city. In the Aden peninsula, centralized Houthi forces are maintaining their blockade on anti-Houthi fighters located in the Western point of the peninsula, allegedly by using artillery fire to turn away ships laden with much-needed supplies. Meanwhile, Saudi-led coalition aircraft have continued to pound Houthi positions from the air, focusing heavily on the vulnerable border areas.
On the diplomatic front, a new date for the planned Geneva talks was established June 1. Rather than negotiating a new political settlement, however, the Geneva talks scheduled for June 10-14 are being framed as an opportunity to discuss the implementation of an existing U.N. Security Council ruling. It is believed that 14 delegates from the various sides of the conflict will be present. Unlike previous negotiations, which ended up being postponed, ousted Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi and his Cabinet have already said they are ready to support the talks.
May 11
A humanitarian cease-fire began at midnight in Yemen, initially for five days but with the option of being extended. The call for a cessation of hostilities is the result of a confluence of factors that could edge the Saudi-supported anti-Houthi movement and the Houthis toward the negotiation table. Leading up to the cease-fire, the Saudi-led air campaign has maintained its punishing intensity, but it has not been able to overcome the gridlock on the ground. Riyadh also deployed additional ground forces to the border town of Najran to protect against Houthi cross-border incursions in the wake of last week's indirect fire attacks.
The air campaign has not been without its hazards. A Moroccan F-16 Fighting Falcon flying as part of the Saudi-led coalition crashed over Yemen on May 11. Initial reports said contact with the aircraft was lost after an unknown projectile hit it. Houthi fighters claimed to have shot it down, but there has been no confirmation of the exact cause of the crash. Imagery from the crash site shows no clear marks from enemy ground fire. On closer examination, however, the nature of the debris field indicates that the aircraft broke up in flight before plummeting to the ground. The Moroccan pilot failed to eject before the crash and recent pictures show his body among the wreckage. It is only the second documented case of a coalition aircraft crashing during Saudi-led air operations.
The first incident involved a Saudi F-15 that went down over the Red Sea in March, requiring the deployment of a U.S. Navy search and rescue helicopter to recover the two pilots. Losses are to be expected in this type of conflict, especially with the high tempo of sorties the Saudi-led coalition is maintaining.
The Battle for Aden
In Aden, Houthi forces made gains throughout the peninsula, despite being mostly dislocated from their immediate supply lines. As well as pushing deeper into Tawahi, the Houthis took full control of the Crater district. Just north of the Aden Peninsula, anti-Houthi forces seized control of the Dar Saad district, which further improves their position as well as their ability to lock Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces in the isolated peninsula. Intense fighting continues in and around Aden airport and it is unclear which side holds the terminal. Because of its location at the natural choke point before the peninsula widens, the airport is key terrain. Holding it enables the Southern Resistance fighters to isolate all the Houthi and Saleh fighters deeper in the peninsula, regardless of the territorial gains made in the Tawahi and Crater districts.
May 9 - Saudis and Houthis Reach a Decision Point in Yemen
Following several days of attacks by Houthi forces on towns just across the Saudi border, Riyadh has offered Yemen's Houthi fighters a humanitarian cease-fire. At the same time, rumors of a potential limited ground incursion into Yemen are growing louder. The Houthis have forced the Saudis to make a decision. With the option of either sitting down at the negotiating table under a cease-fire or being drawn into a ground incursion inside Yemen, Riyadh will have to carefully evaluate its strength and the risks involved in either situation.
While military operations in Yemen have significantly constrained the movement of the Houthis and their allies; the air campaign has not yet been able to reverse their earlier gains; and the threat along the Saudi border has not been eliminated. A humanitarian cease-fire lasting at least five days, allegedly to begin on May 12, leading to a negotiated settlement would offer Saudi military decision-makers both short-term results and a more sustainable long-term stability.
April 30-May 5
Ground fighting continues in Taiz, Lawder, Lahj, Dali and Marib between Houthis and elements aligned with former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh on the one hand and anti-Houthi forces on the other. Although no significant gains have been made by either side, the Saudi-led air campaign has limited the ability of the Houthis to project power across the country.
The battle for Aden is ongoing, with the heaviest fighting focused near the airport, which anti-Houthi fighters allegedly still control. Coalition aircraft have been pounding Aden heavily, dropping ordnance on Houthi and Saleh positions in the Maala port district, around the airport and in the northern Dar Saad district of the city. Over the weekend, anti-Houthi fighters in Aden received a much-needed uplift in manpower. If observers on the ground were correct, these reinforcements reportedly came from the United Arab Emirates and are soldiers of Yemeni descent. The new troops were involved in fighting adjacent to the airport, likely in an attempt to exploit the recent gains made by the Southern Movement militia.
Although there is no hard evidence that Saudi or UAE special operations forces are accompanying the new fighters, it is probable that coalition specialists are present in Aden in some form, helping organize anti-Houthi forces as well as coordinating air assets. The deployment of reinforcements to Aden illustrates the Saudi intent to directly influence ground operations. The air campaign is doing a good job of interdicting the movement of Houthi and Saleh forces, and increased cooperation between local resistance groups and periodic uplifts in combatants will be instrumental in staging further counteroffensives. Houthi forces have made some gains, however, mainly around the port district, but the loss of the airport imposes a huge barrier to their attempts to take control of Aden.
On Yemen's northern border, Houthi fighters conducted several more incursions into Saudi Arabia. Saudi forces have allegedly been forced to abandon several border posts, and in the city of Najran, flights to the airport were suspended and schools closed because of shelling by Houthi mortars and rocket artillery. These incursions into Saudi Arabia by the Houthis are not isolated, but it is the first time a population center has been directly targeted. Riyadh will continue to have problems closing down its porous border with Yemen, but Houthi fighters are likely to remain a threat only in the immediate vicinity of the border, lacking the ability to conduct deep cross-border operations.
April 29
The battle for Aden is becoming increasingly desperate for the remaining Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces on the peninsula. In a bold move, opposition fighters from the ardently anti-Houthi Youth Resistance made a significant push from the Mansoura district of Aden toward the airport. Houthi and Saleh fighters are now completely cut off from their supply lines, though they still control the Badr Air Force Camp south of the airport, along with the control tower and surrounding buildings. Despite losing ground to the north, however, the Houthis were able to recover territory along the eastern coastline of the Aden Peninsula, including the disputed seaport. They were also able to take and hold the Russian consulate, a key defensive node.
Buoyed by success, the Youth Resistance is calling for all able-bodied fighters to flock to the front line. Because of the rapid gains made against them, Houthi and Saleh forces in Aden city have now become trapped between the Khormaksar, Maala and Crater districts. It is a position that will be difficult to maintain, so long as they are wedged between the offensive coming from the north, and the anti-Houthi contingent in the Tawahi and Crater districts that continue to hold their ground. If the Houthis are unable to receive supplies or reinforcements soon, the battle for Aden may well be in its final stages. The sustained interdiction of Houthi supplies and reinforcements, resulting from previous successful offensives near Lawder, Lahj and Taiz, has given the anti-Houthi forces a tactical advantage on the ground.
Elsewhere in Yemen
Fighting in Taiz governorate continues, though interruptions have periodically occurred as a result of local humanitarian cease-fires. The Saudi-led coalition parachute-dropped supplies and weapons to resistance fighters opposing Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces in and around Taiz city.
In Abyan governorate, anti-Houthi forces continue to make substantial gains near Lawder. The coalition air campaign is showing no signs of abating, causing attrition to Houthi and Saleh targets around Sanaa, as well as in Marib, Aden and other locations around Yemen.
April 24-28
Despite the transition from Operation Decisive Storm to Operation Restoring Hope, Saudi-led coalition airstrikes continue with no reduction in intensity, targeting Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces across Yemen.
Fighting endures in Taiz and Lahj governorates as well as along other main supply routes and logistic corridors. In the ongoing battle near Lawder, abutting the northeastern Houthi supply lines into Aden, Southern Movement fighters have been making significant gains. They have established control over key locations and severely damaged a Houthi convoy attempting to move through the area.
By blocking essential supplies, the fight for Aden has turned into a mutual starvation war of sorts. Houthi and Saleh forces inside Aden are isolating pro-Hadi and other anti-Houthi fighters in several districts at the bottom of the peninsula, while Southern Movement fighters that have fought their way into Aden from the north are isolating those Houthi and Saleh forces by complicating their resupply and reinforcements. The Houthi and Saleh forces have in turn taken control of the banking sectors in the governorates surrounding Aden and are preventing the local population from accessing essential funds and salaries.
Inside the city of Aden itself, Houthi and Saleh forces have been trying to hit back against the Southern Movement offensive from the north, which occurred last week. They have taken positions at the University of Aden and the hospital (both in Khormaksar district) and have been engaged in heavy fighting with Southern Movement fighters there. Coalition aircraft and ships also continue to strike Houthi and Saleh positions in Aden.
Just north of the Aden Peninsula, Houthi forces have pushed west, trying to recover key terrain they lost earlier to local militias, exposing them to the risk of being cut off from their supply lines from the north.
In an effort to prevent aid getting through to Houthi and Saleh elements elsewhere in Aden, Saudi aircraft bombed Sanaa International Airport, preventing an Iranian cargo aircraft from touching down. It was believed that the aircraft contained aid for the Houthis, but could also have contained weapons or military equipment. Sanaa airport remains closed to air traffic. Bombing the runway was a creative solution to preventing Iran from landing supplies — without shooting down the plane — but it also means than any other humanitarian flights will no longer be able to use the airport as long as it is closed, or Saudis prevent aircraft from landing.
A Saudi military spokesman said the Iranian aircraft did not coordinate with coalition authorities and the pilot ignored a warning advising him to turn back. The denial of supplies fits into the larger picture of preventing Iranian-facilitated logistic support from reaching Houthi and Saleh fighters. A convoy of Iranian cargo ships, allegedly carrying weapons, was diverted April 23, following multiple statements saying that they would not be allowed to dock in Yemen. The United States even diverted an aircraft carrier from the Persian Gulf to track the convoy. As well as Saudi and Egyptian vessels, there is a sizable U.S. Navy presence in the Gulf of Aden.
April 23
A shift occurred in the Saudi-led military campaign in Yemen; interpreted by some as a cessation of hostilities, or an end to the Saudi-led air campaign. In reality the change is much more nuanced and indicative of Riyadh's broader strategy. The interplay of consecutive operations in a military campaign and the efforts to achieve a negotiated solution to the crisis are driving a change in focus, not an actual end to military operations.
Read the full analysis: The State of Play in Yemen
April 21-22
Iran dispatched a naval convoy of freighters to international waters near the border of Oman and Yemen, raising new fears of a potential confrontation in the region. The convoy, last reported to be stationary, is assumed to be a possible attempt to support Houthi fighters and forces loyal to former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. It comes in spite of a blockade implemented by Saudi, Egyptian and UAE ships. U.S. officials, as well as the Saudi-led coalition, suspect that the convoy contains arms. Consequently, the United States has rushed an aircraft carrier and a guided missile cruiser to the area. Overall, Iran has a weak military hand to play in Yemen. Deploying the convoy there may be more about shaping a political narrative than achieving a military objective on the ground.
Read the full analysis: Iranian Naval Presence Raises the Odds of Confrontation
April 17-20
In an effort to support the offensive to capture Aden, Houthi militias and forces loyal to former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh have fought hard to maintain supply lines to the southern port. This has been no easy task, with the opposition continually interdicting and harassing vulnerable logistic chains. Over the weekend, the anti-Houthi Southern Movement succeeded in isolating Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces in Aden, making a push to the west of the city and taking ground adjacent to the Imran port area, cutting off several supply routes.
Not only does this — combined with the other operations in Lahj and Lawder — leave Houthi and Saleh forces stranded in Aden with finite supplies of ammunition and fighters, but it also cuts off their withdrawal route. Further compounding the Houthi position, Southern Movement fighters located at Lahj and al-Anad air base made a bold push south, handrailing the eastern coastline of the peninsula. Maintaining their momentum, they succeeded in taking control of Aden International Airport and the Russian Consulate, effectively insinuating themselves in the Houthi rear. The Houthis and Saleh-aligned forces remaining in Aden attempted to retake the ground lost over the weekend but with no success. Reports indicate the Southern Movement militia consolidated in the Russian Consulate and is continuing to push further south.
Though fighting continues along static lines in the Maala and Crater districts of Aden, the opening up of a second front is a serious diversion for Houthi and Saleh fighters. Committed in both directions, facing an aggressive enemy with ready access to fresh manpower and supplies, the Houthis run a considerable risk of becoming fully encircled in the geographically isolated Aden Peninsula. If the Southern Movement continues to push home its advantage, the battle for Aden could take a rapid turn in favor of the anti-Houthi militias.
A victory in Aden would not only boost morale among the populist militias, but it would also provide a staging post from where the anti-Houthi Southern Movement, backed by several military units still loyal to beleaguered President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, could expand. Previously committed forces would be freed up to reorient toward Lahj, Lawder and potentially further afield in places such as Taiz province, where anti-Houthi forces have already made gains. By focusing outward, the Southern Movement can open up new offensives, support existing ones, or expand captured areas. Besides securing the fallback refuge of Hadi — currently residing in Riyadh — holding Aden provides the anti-Houthi forces with a bridgehead that could be used to receive supplies or even reinforcements from the Saudi-led coalition.
Outside of Aden
In another turn of events, the U.S. Navy carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is steaming toward the coast of Yemen, reportedly to assist in the operation to interdict Iranian supply shipments to the Houthis. The carrier, which replaced the USS Carl Vinson on April 17, was intended to support coalition operations against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The very fact that the carrier is being reassigned is a good indication of Washington's priorities in the Persian Gulf. The USS Theodore Roosevelt will join the amphibious readiness group already operating off Yemen's coast, led by the USS Iwo Jima.
Also of note, a huge explosion occurred in the Fajj Attan hill district of Sanaa on April 20, following a Saudi airstrike on a Republican Guard military base. The detonation was reportedly so large that blast damage was recorded well over a kilometer away. Scores of buildings were severely damaged, and a Yemeni official from the Health Ministry reported 25 fatalities and over 350 wounded as a result of the explosion, many injured by falling glass. Several foreign embassies were also damaged.
The Republican Guard base was occupied by troops loyal to Saleh and had been hit repeatedly following the commencement of Saudi coalition airstrikes. It appears that the target of the April 20 airstrike was a Scud missile storage depot. Examining footage of the strike, it appears that the outsize explosion may have resulted from a direct hit on the fuel storage facilities. Scuds are liquid-fueled missiles, and the fireball and black smoke immediately after detonation are consistent with petroleum tanks igniting. It is not known how many Republican Guard personnel were killed, but gauging from the number of civilian casualties, the death toll inside the base must have been heavy. If usable Scud warheads remain at the Fajj Attan location, the base will likely receive further airstrikes. At present the location of Saleh is unknown, but the assumption is that he is orchestrating his forces from a well-defended bunker.
April 14-16
The Saudi-led air campaign is continuing at a high tempo, but the target set is shifting from high-grade targets to objectives with a lower payoff. This is partially thanks to the successful targeting of large-scale weapons depots and specific materiel. With the majority of high-value targets engaged, bombs are starting to fall on opportunity targets. The airstrikes are also becoming more discriminating through necessity; with their mobility reduced, Houthi rebels and forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh are embedding themselves in population centers. The Houthis are also exploiting Yemen's difficult mountain terrain to avoid airstrikes. The constant threat of close air support — and its particular effectiveness on ground columns, massed vehicles and personnel — has slowed Houthi ground offensives on the whole, while keeping anti-Houthi forces in the game.
As an additional boost to the forces opposing the Houthi and Saleh onslaught, large numbers of previously neutral military units have, in the past few days, confirmed their allegiance to embattled President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi. The perceived success of the air campaign, coupled with the fact that to do nothing is to eventually become a target, either from the air or on the ground, are likely explanations. Notably, even a number of previously pro-Saleh units have come out in recognition of Hadi's right to rule, pledging their allegiance in the process.
Capitalizing on Chaos
Taking advantage of the tumultuous situation in Yemen, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has been pressing its advantage, consolidating control in the coastal region of Mukalla. Al Qaeda fighters successfully took control of the Mukalla seaport, Riyan air base and the al-Dhaba oil export terminal on April 16. Riyan air base was home to both the 27th Infantry Brigade and the 190th Air Defense Brigade, both loyal to Hadi. The brigades initially refused to hand control of the facility to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, but after brief clashes the military units withdrew. Not only does al Qaeda control the air base, it allegedly has access to the remaining air defense equipment not removed or disabled.
The two military groups were in a difficult position to begin with. By opposing the Houthi and Saleh militias, the pro-Hadi forces found themselves inadvertently aligned with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which is vehemently anti-Houthi and supports combat operations against them. This tension was likely a driving factor in the withdrawal of the military; an engagement with al Qaeda would have been detrimental to both, diluting combat power at a time when the Houthis present the biggest threat.
To some extent, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula already controlled Mukalla, Riyan, Ghayl Ba Wazir and Ash Shihr. The significance of the group's April 16 move is in the consolidation of control over the area, as a result of taking direct ownership of critical infrastructure. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is actively blunting the Houthi offensives. A good example of this is the sustained vehicle-borne improvised explosive device campaign against Houthis in the Lawder area over recent days. Despite its anti-Houthi stance, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is gladly using the situation in Yemen to expand its actual control in different parts of country, where no one is capable or willing to oppose it.
Yemen's Contested Battlespace
The situation in the southern port city of Aden remains largely the same. Houthi and anti-Houthi forces continue to fight for key terrain, though the Houthis have the advantage of holding the high ground, occupying positions in the mountains around Aden as well as the Crater district. They are using these elevated fire positions to good effect, engaging the anti-Houthi forces in the city with sniper and harassing fire. Nevertheless, anti-Houthi fighters managed to clear some of the Houthi positions on the Crater slopes, but the high ground is heavily contested.
Northwest of Aden, the battle for Taiz continues in the mountainous province. The pro-Hadi 35th Armored Brigade narrowly escaped encirclement by Saleh loyalists, mainly thanks to the efforts of rural militias. These militias are fighting in support of the 35th in opposition to Houthi and pro-Saleh forces.
The offensive by Saleh forces in Dali, 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of Aden, has effectively been halted. The fighting has further diminished the pro-Saleh 33rd Armored Brigade, which was already depleted by Saudi airstrikes earlier in the campaign.
Near the city of Marib, 120 kilometers east of Sanaa, the Houthis continue to push from the west. The fighting has yet to reach the city, however, because tribal militias are throwing everything against the Houthis in an effort to stop their advance, sustaining heavy casualties in the process. Given the intensity of the close combat, it is uncertain how long the militias will be able to hold out.
April 11-13
The conflict in Yemen shows no sign of abating. Intense fighting continued throughout the weekend, and now, a number of distinct battlefronts have emerged. Houthi militants and forces aligned with Yemen's former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, are fighting for control of a number of key localities in the south of the country. At the same time, they are expanding east into Yemen's oil-rich territories, which brings Houthi and Saleh forces into direct conflict with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula as well as other opposing forces.
In the mountainous province of Taiz, the 35th Armored Brigade, a unit that swore loyalty to Yemen's incumbent president Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, is assaulting the 22nd Armored Brigade, which is loyal to Saleh. The pro-Hadi formation is greatly supported by Saudi-led coalition airstrikes, and heavy fighting is taking place across the undulating, close terrain of Taiz. In Ad Dali province, tribal fighters are heavily engaging Houthi militias in the town of the same name, and reports from the ground indicate that the tribes are inflicting significant casualties on their opponents. Elements of the Saleh-aligned 33rd Armored Brigade have repositioned to assist, having suffered heavy attrition from the Saudi air campaign in Bayhan district.
Houthi and Saleh reinforcements from Ibb are moving through Taiz toward Aden, potentially to fight anti-Houthi forces around Lahj and al-Anad air base on the way to the port city. The anti-Houthi forces have successfully interdicted Houthi supply lines to the south and have isolated the remaining Houthi and Saleh forces in Aden, severely threatening the offensive. Despite this, the fight for Aden's port remains fierce, particularly around the Hadjiv traffic circle. The Saudi-led air campaign, supported by naval artillery fire, continues to strike Houthi and Saleh positions throughout the city, including the presidential palace. Immediately northwest of Aden, in Sheikh Othman, anti-Houthi militias and forces loyal to Hadi continue to attack.
Aside from the fight for control over Aden, separate offensives are ongoing in the east of the country, where the al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula heartland and Yemen's main oil infrastructure are located. Remaining military units have been preparing themselves to face the Houthi advance, including the 2nd Naval Infantry Brigade following its declaration of loyalty to Hadi. The brigade is cooperating with local tribes to set up the defense of the town of Belhaf and its liquefied natural gas facility operated by Total. In addition, local tribes in Hadramawt province have stated their intention to raise an army of 20,000 fighters to oppose the Houthi movement. So far, the Houthis have been able to make significant advances in the east. They captured the capital of the Shabwa governorate, Ataq, last week and are beginning to push into the town of Marib. The Saudi-led coalition has targeted them at both locations to disrupt their advance.
Finally, to the north, the Houthis conducted another border incursion into Saudi Arabia over the weekend. The move comes at a time when Riyadh is actively trying to clear civilians from villages along its southern border. Conventional Saudi ground forces have yet to penetrate south, but Egypt reportedly deployed troops to Perim, and island in the Bab el-Mandeb strait, to conduct a battle damage assessment following airstrikes against Houthi forces.
April 9-10
Fighting across the Aden Peninsula has stagnated in recent days but remains focused on the Maala and Crater districts. Reports indicate that the tide is turning against Houthi militants and forces loyal to Yemen's former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh. In Sheikh Uthman, a satellite city that is effectively a northern suburb of Aden, anti-Houthi forces and elements of a brigade still loyal to Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi are threatening to cut off opposing forces inside Aden.
Elsewhere in Yemen, anti-Houthi forces continue to disrupt the supply lines of Houthi and pro-Saleh militias north of Aden. By holding al-Anad air base and interdicting the flow of arms and personnel in Lawder province, anti-Houthi forces have impacted the success of the offensive against Aden.
In Shabwah province, however, the Houthi offensive is proceeding largely as planned, with the town of Ataq falling to the militants. Although resistance was reportedly scant, the success of the offensive was in no small part thanks to the presence of the 21st Mechanized Infantry Brigade, a formation based in the area that aligned with the Houthi and Saleh movement when Ataq came under pressure.
Al Qaeda in the Arabia Peninsula has already begun a guerrilla campaign against Houthi and Saleh forces near Ataq, using at least one vehicle-borne improvised explosive device in what is likely to be a campaign of continued resistance. In Ibb province, located halfway between Sanaa and Aden, al Qaeda fighters have been taking over positions previously abandoned by Houthi forces.
April 7-8
Heavy fighting continues to define the battle for Aden. Coalition airstrikes and naval gunfire from Saudi and Egyptian vessels have persistently engaged Houthi and Saleh-held areas of the city. The frontline has not shifted significantly and fighting remains focused predominantly on the edges of the Maala port locality and the Crater district. In a blow to the Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces in Aden, however, essential supply lines linking the city with other concentrations of fighters and resources have been effectively severed.
Further north, anti-Houthi militias are fighting to keep control of the al-Anad air base (which they captured April 6), heavily buoyed by Saudi close air support. Besides attempting to take the air base back, the Houthis are trying to re-establish control of the road linking Aden to Taiz, but so far they have not been able to do so. To the east, units of the 111th Infantry Brigade, which remains loyal to President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi and was originally stationed in Ahwar, are closing down the town of Lawder, blocking nearby roads. Troops from the Saleh-aligned 15th and 117th infantry brigades are fighting resistance battles around Lawder district itself, attempting to reconnect with Houthi and Saleh forces in Aden.
While the Saleh-aligned units in Lawder are reportedly still receiving supplies from Bayda to the northwest, if Houthi forces and their affiliates in Aden are separated from their supply lines for an extended period of time, it could damage their ability to continue the Aden offensive. Being logistically isolated will also dampen their resistance to smaller counteroffensives by tribal militias and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula fighters in other locations across what is an increasingly disconnected pocket.
Elsewhere, however, Houthi forces continue to advance where they can. They are moving on the town of Ataq, capital of the Shabwa region, and could push even further east into the areas of Yemen where critical energy facilities are located. The presence of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in these locations could yet slow this advance, however.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is exploiting the divisions within Yemen for its own ends, extending its reach across the country. Most recently, the terrorist organization took control of a border post near Manwakh, on the Saudi border. The group has also been active near Lawder, but rather than showing loyalty to forces aligned with Yemen's erstwhile president, their main interest is in combating Houthi influence in the region. This has resulted in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula coming into conflict with local anti-Houthi militias, and at Mukalla, tribal fighters are still attempting to mount an offensive to push al Qaeda out of the area.
April 4-6
Over the weekend, Houthi and Saleh-aligned forces recovered ground they were forced to abandon April 3 under pressure from Saudi-led coalition airstrikes. Aside from retaking the presidential palace in the southeast corner of the peninsula, militants also occupied positions on Mount Shamsan overlooking Aden's Crater district, an area that remains strongly contested. On the northern edge of the Aden peninsula, Houthi fighters are pushing hard into the Maala district, where the seaport is located. Although the strategic port remains disputed for now, the security situation is rapidly deteriorating.
On April 4, gunfire from the shore forced a pair of rigid inflatable boats operated by the French navy to turn away from their approach. The French government was attempting the evacuation of 44 civilians of various nationalities from Aden but was forced to enlist the help of the self-proclaimed Yemeni coast guard to shuttle the civilians to ships waiting in open water. Successful evacuation attempts had been carried out days earlier, but as the French effort on April 4 proved, negotiating the port is increasingly treacherous. This creates a problem for fighters opposing the Houthi and pro-Saleh forces in Aden because resupply by sea is now increasingly difficult. Although some supplies were delivered by guided parachute last week, urban fighting is notoriously ammunition-intensive.
Besides placing a burden on logistics and making the extraction of personnel increasingly hazardous, a contested port means that there is now an increased risk to any forces seeking to dock and disembark troops to help secure the peninsula. Though the Houthis and Saleh-aligned militants have made gains, including taking control of al-Ummal island, the forces opposing them continue to put up strong resistance, backed by close air support and supply drops from the air. So far, they have not suffered a defeat that they cannot recover from.
Wider Yemen
To the north of Aden, tribal militias opposing Houthi fighters are staging a number of different offensives. At least some o
-
:-o :-o :-o
WASHINGTON — The United Arab Emirates has secretly dispatched hundreds of Colombian mercenaries to Yemen to fight in that country’s raging conflict, adding a volatile new element in a complex proxy war that has drawn in the United States and Iran.
From Our Advertisers
It is the first combat deployment for a foreign army that the Emirates has quietly built in the desert over the past five years, according to several people currently or formerly involved with the project. The program was once managed by a private company connected to Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater Worldwide, but the people involved in the effort said that his role ended several years ago and that it has since been run by the Emirati military.
The arrival in Yemen of 450 Latin American troops — among them are also Panamanian, Salvadoran and Chilean soldiers — adds to the chaotic stew of government armies, armed tribes, terrorist networks and Yemeni militias currently at war in the country. Earlier this year, a coalition of countries led by Saudi Arabia, including the United States, began a military campaign in Yemen against Houthi rebels who have pushed the Yemeni government out of the capital, Sana.
Saudi Arabia
Leading a coalition of Sunni nations that includes Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Egypt. The country has also recruited Sudanese fighters for the campaign.
United Arab Emirates
In addition to sending its own special operations troops, the U.A.E. has sent more than 400 Colombian troops to Yemen who had been training in the Emirati desert.
United States
Has provided intelligence to help targeting for airstrikes, as well as refueling aircraft and other logistical support.
Against Yemen’s government
Houthi rebels
The Shiite group that pushed the Yemeni government out of Sana, the capital.
Iran
Although Iran has not officially acknowledged its role in the conflict, it has provided military and financial support to the Houthis over the years.
It is also a glimpse into the future of war. Wealthy Arab nations, particularly Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Emirates, have in recent years embraced a more aggressive military strategy throughout the Middle East, trying to rein in the chaos unleashed by the Arab revolutions that began in late 2010. But these countries wade into the new conflicts — whether in Yemen, Syria or Libya — with militaries that are unused to sustained warfare and populations with generally little interest in military service.
“Mercenaries are an attractive option for rich countries who wish to wage war yet whose citizens may not want to fight,” said Sean McFate, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and author of “The Modern Mercenary.”
“The private military industry is global now,” said Mr. McFate, adding that the United States essentially “legitimized” the industry with its heavy reliance on contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan over more than a decade of war. “Latin American mercenaries are a sign of what’s to come,” he said.
The Colombian troops now in Yemen, handpicked from a brigade of some 1,800 Latin American soldiers training at an Emirati military base, were woken up in the middle of the night for their deployment to Yemen last month. They were ushered out of their barracks as their bunkmates continued sleeping, and were later issued dog tags and ranks in the Emirati military. Those left behind are now being trained to use grenade launchers and armored vehicles that Emirati troops are currently using in Yemen.
Emirati officials have made a point of recruiting Colombian troops over other Latin American soldiers because they consider the Colombians more battle tested in guerrilla warfare, having spent decades battling gunmen of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, in the jungles of Colombia.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The exact mission of the Colombians in Yemen is unclear, and one person involved in the project said it could be weeks before they saw regular combat. They join hundreds of Sudanese soldiers whom Saudi Arabia has recruited to fight there as part of the coalition.
In addition, a recent United Nations report cited claims that some 400 Eritrean troops might be embedded with the Emirati soldiers in Yemen — something that, if true, could violate a United Nations resolution restricting Eritrean military activities.
The United States has also been participating in the Saudi-led campaign in Yemen, providing logistical support, including airborne refueling, to the nations conducting the airstrikes. The Pentagon has sent a team to Saudi Arabia to provide targeting intelligence to the coalition militaries that is regularly used for the airstrikes.
The Obama administration has also in recent years approved the sale of billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware from American contractors to the Saudi and Emirati militaries, equipment that is being used in the Yemen conflict. This month, the administration authorized a $1.29 billion Saudi request for thousands of bombs to replenish stocks that had been depleted by the campaign in Yemen, although American officials say that the bombs would take months to arrive and were not directly tied to the war in Yemen.
The Saudi air campaign has received widespread criticism from human rights groups as being poorly planned and as having launched strikes that indiscriminately kill Yemeni civilians and aid workers in the country. Last month, Saudi jets struck a hospital run by Doctors Without Borders in Saada Province in northern Yemen, and in late September the United Nations reported that 2,355 civilians had been killed since the campaign began in March.
On the other side in Yemen is Iran, which over the years has provided financial and military support to the Houthis, the Shiite rebel group fighting the coalition of Saudi-led Sunni nations. The divisions have created the veneer of a sectarian conflict, although Emirati troops in southern Yemen have also been battling members of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the Sunni terrorist group’s affiliate in Yemen.
Dozens of Emirati special operations troops have died since they arrived in southern Yemen in August. A single rocket attack in early September killed 45, along with several Saudi and Bahrani soldiers.
The presence of the Latin American troops is an official secret in the Emirates, and the government has made no public mention of their deployment to Yemen. Yousef Otaiba, the Emirati ambassador to Washington, declined to comment. A spokesman for United States Central Command, the military headquarters overseeing America’s involvement in the Yemen conflict, also declined to comment.
The Latin American force in the Emirates was originally conceived to carry out mostly domestic missions — guarding pipelines and other sensitive infrastructure and possibly putting down riots in the sprawling camps housing foreign workers in the Emirates — according to corporate documents, American officials and several people involved in the project.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
A 2011 intelligence briefing for senior leaders involved in the project listed Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Somali pirates and domestic riots as some of the biggest threats to Emirati stability.
The troops were told that they might one day be called for foreign combat missions, but until the deployment to Yemen the only external missions they were given were to provide security on commercial cargo vessels.
Those missions were rare, and soldiers involved in the project describe years of monotony at the desert camp, housed within a sprawling Emirati military base called Zayed Military City. They rise every day at 5 a.m. for exercise and military training — including shooting practice, navigation and riot control. A number of Westerners, including several Americans, live at the camp and serve as trainers for the Latin American troops.
But by late morning the sun burns so hot at the windswept complex that the troops move into air-conditioned classrooms for military instruction.
The troops live in typically austere military barracks, hanging their laundry out the windows to dry in the hot air. There is a common computer room where they can check their email and Facebook pages, but they are not allowed to post photographs on social media sites. Meals are basic.
“It’s the same food all the time, every day,” one member of the project said several weeks ago. “Chicken every single day.”
The Emiratis have spent the equivalent of millions of dollars equipping the unit, from firearms and armored vehicles to communications systems and night vision technology. But Emirati leaders rarely visit the camp. When they do, the troops put on tactical demonstrations, including rappelling from helicopters and driving armored dune buggies.
And yet they stay largely because of the money, receiving salaries ranging from $2,000 to $3,000 a month, compared with approximately $400 a month they would make in Colombia. Those troops who deploy to Yemen will receive an additional $1,000 per week, according to a person involved in the project and a former senior Colombian military officer.
Hundreds of Colombian troops have been trained in the Emirates since the project began in 2010 — so many that the Colombian government once tried to broker an agreement with Emirati officials to stanch the flow headed to the Persian Gulf. Representatives from the two governments met, but an agreement was never signed.
Most of the recruiting of former troops in Colombia is done by Global Enterprises, a Colombian company run by a former special operations commander named Oscar Garcia Batte. Mr. Batte is also co-commander of the brigade of Colombian troops in the Emirates, and is part of the force now deployed in Yemen.
Mr. McFate said that the steady migration of Latin American troops to the Persian Gulf had created a “gun drain” at a time when Latin American countries need soldiers in the battle against drug cartels.
But experts in Colombia said that the promise of making more money fighting for the Emirates — money that the troops send much of home to their families in Colombia — makes it hard to keep soldiers at home.
“These great offers, with good salaries and insurance, got the attention of our best soldiers,” said Jaime Ruiz, the president of Colombia’s Association of Retired Armed Forces Officials.
“Many of them retired from the army and left.”
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/05/06/u-s-forces-now-on-the-ground-supporting-combat-operations-in-yemen-pentagon-says/
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/world/middleeast/yemen-special-operations-missions.html?emc=edit_ta_20170207&nl=top-stories&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0
-
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/03/05/trump-orders-counterterrorism-expansion-yemen.html
-
Regions & Countries
Topics
Themes
Houthi rebels in Yemen claim to have hit at an oil refinery in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia, about 900 kilometers (560 miles) from the border with Yemen, with a ballistic missile. If true, the Houthi claim raises several questions regarding the group's missile capabilities. Saudi Arabia, in the meantime, blamed the July 22 explosion at the facility on an overheated electrical transformer. Outside the Houthis, no other parties have confirmed the missile strike, but if a missile fired from Yemen indeed traveled that far into Saudi territory, it would indicate a much greater capability than the Houthis had previously demonstrated.
The rebel forces in Yemen have been known to operate ballistic missiles, such as the Scud, Tochka or Luna varieties — most of which are originally Russian-made. None of those missiles, however, have the range enabling the Houthis to fire at targets such as the Yanbu refinery, or at Riyadh, or Mecca, as past Houthi claims have stated. Scud-C missiles, also known as Hwasong-6 by their North Korean name, have the longest range in the known arsenal of the former Yemeni army, some of whose members sided with the Houthis in the ongoing conflict. With a maximum range of 500 kilometers, the North Korean missiles, allegedly smuggled to Yemen during former President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s reign, would fall short of the claimed targets.
The Houthi fighters refer to their missiles as the Borkan type — consisting of Borkan-1 and Borkan-2 variants. In making the Yanbu claim, the rebel forces say they launched a Borkan-2H — though in pictures the missile appears identical to the Scud family of missiles. The story proclaimed by the fighters is that Yemen domestically manufactured the projectiles. While that claim is likely false, modifications such as combining parts of two separate Scud-type missiles could increase fuel capacity, flight time and range. At a certain point, however, such improvised extensions of range would require more complex re-engineering of the missile's internal structure. Haphazard alterations that disrupted the missile's center of gravity would prevent it from flying straight.
For such complex retooling, it is likely that Yemeni forces would lean heavily on external support. Yemen’s Houthi rebels have enjoyed a long-standing relationship with Iran, which happens to be one of the countries that has excelled at pushing the boundaries of the Scud’s capabilities. Due to the past evidence of North Korean missile supply to Yemen, it is also possible that North Korean experts are somehow involved.
The effects of the ballistic missile strikes remain minimal within Saudi Arabia. Patriot air defense systems allegedly intercept most missile launches into the kingdom, and those few that allegedly reached their targets did not result in notable damage. The ballistic missiles used within Yemen against coalition forces have had a far more notable effect on the battlefield in comparison.
Regardless of the exact manner in which Yemeni forces modify their missiles, the Houthi fighters have managed to sustain their missile threat in the face of the lasting air campaign against them. Despite the fact that the Saudi-led coalition has specifically targeted the ballistic missile capability in Yemen, the rebel forces have been able to safeguard stockpiles of missiles against coalition intelligence-gathering efforts and airstrikes.
The continued future viability of the Houthi missile threat is not guaranteed. It's a distinct possibliity that the rebels could deplete their missile stockpiles or that Saudi air operations could succeed at destroying the essential launch vehicles. Intelligence operations will be critical in attempting to target the launchers, and the United States — which has considered expanding its role in Yemen — could play a notable part in that effort.
-
Saudi Arabia's Strategic Miscalculation in Yemen
by Hilal Khashan
Stratfor Worldview
November 10, 2017
http://www.meforum.org/7008/saudi-arabia-makes-strategic-miscalculation
Saudi Arabia is embroiled in a war in Yemen that it can't win.
Saudi Arabia seems to have bitten off more than it can chew in Yemen. On March 26, 2015, the kingdom launched Operation Decisive Storm, a broad Arab-Islamic initiative ostensibly aimed at reinstating the government of Yemeni President Abd Rabboh Mansour Hadi, whom insurgents had forced from the capital, Sanaa, a month earlier. More than two and a half years on, Saudi Arabia is no closer to its goal, embroiled in a war that it can't win.
How did the country wind up making such a strategic blunder? Going into the conflict, its leaders were well aware of the steep odds against the operation's success — of Yemen's unconquerable terrain and intractable tribal machinations. The Saudis tend to equivocate in their explanations of what drove them to intervene in the war-torn country in the first place. But a look at the kingdom's history and founding ideology offers insight into Riyadh's dilemma in Yemen.
A Legacy of Conquest in the Arabian Peninsula
Saudi Arabia's history is one of bloodshed. The alliance that Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab formed in the mid-18th century with the founder of the first Saudi state, Muhammad ibn Saud, established the kingdom's policy to pursue its objectives by force rather than diplomacy. By the end of the 1700s, Wahhab's followers would put that policy into action. They invaded Kuwait in 1793, laid siege to Ras al-Khaima (now part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1799, entered Bahrain in 1801, attacked Karbala, in modern-day Iraq, in 1802, and briefly took Basra and Jeddah the next year. In 1818, the Egyptian army destroyed the Saudi state, but the country emerged in its modern incarnation at the turn of the 20th century.
And like its predecessors (including the second Saudi state, which lasted from 1824 to 1891), the new kingdom had a penchant for war. The Saudis brought the Hashemite Kingdom of Hejaz to its demise in the 1920s through a series of gruesome massacres, and the next decade, they took on Yemen. During the war of 1934, Saudi Arabia seized Asir, Jizan and Najran from its southwestern neighbor, driving a permanent wedge between the two countries. Abdulaziz ibn Saud, founder of the modern Saudi state, reportedly told his sons on his deathbed nearly 20 years later that to maintain their country's strength, they must keep Yemen weak.
Origins of a Conflict
When a group of revolutionaries deposed Yemen's monarch in 1962, a civil war broke out between Yemeni royalists and advocates of a republican system of government. Saudi Arabia's leaders, worried that the political upheaval could seep into their territory, sided with the royalists in the eight-year conflict.
Saudi-backed royalists in Yemen, 1962.
After the two sides reached a compromise to end the war, Riyadh's military involvement in Yemen gave way to a subtler intervention. Saudi Arabia worked to buy influence with the country's various tribes and in the 1990s threw its weight behind Islah, an Islamist party with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, to counter President Ali Abdullah Saleh's General People's Congress.
Around the same time, the Houthi movement emerged among Yemen's Zaidi Shiite population, preaching peace, tolerance and cultural openness. The movement had evolved into an insurgency by the early 2000s, despite its pacifist claims, and in November 2009, the Houthis seized a mountainous section of Saudi Arabia's Jizan province, near the border. From Saudi Arabia's perspective, the incursion — retaliation against Riyadh for allegedly allowing Yemeni army units onto Saudi territory to carry out strikes against the Houthis — violated the tacit conditions of the truce it made with Yemen after the 1934 war. And so, it struck back, launching its first military offensive in nearly two decades. Though the brief conflict highlighted the limitations of their military capabilities, the Saudis nevertheless felt certain that a full-blown war was inevitable.
The alliance between Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and the founder of the first Saudi state established the kingdom's policy to pursue its objectives by force.
Houthi fighters in Sanaa, shortly after their capture of the Yemeni capital in September 2014.
The Yemeni Revolution of 2011 laid the groundwork for the next clash. The uprising, during which Saleh stepped down from power, filled many Yemenis with hope that their country would establish a modern, independent political system. But the transition fell short of the population's expectations: The new president, Hadi, encountered numerous challenges to his rule, and Yemen soon descended into chaos. A few years later in September 2014, the Houthis took control of Sanaa, and in February 2015, they unveiled a constitutional declaration to transform the country's political system.
For the Saudi government — which views the monarchy's continuity as the key to the kingdom's security — the Houthis' revolution hit too close to home. Riyadh worried that the Houthi takeover in Sanaa would galvanize Saudi Arabia's Zaidi and Ismaili Shiite population near the Yemeni border. In addition, the Houthis' long-standing ties with Iran heightened the kingdom's concerns over Tehran's expanding influence in the region. Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners, including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Egypt, Sudan, Morocco, Jordan and Pakistan, began their operation against the Houthis the following month. If air power could achieve spectacular victories in the Six-Day War of 1967 and in Desert Storm in 1991, the Saudis reasoned, an air campaign would work in Yemen, as well.
A Coalition of Uncommon Interests
Compared with the coalition's leader, however, its other members had less at stake in Yemen. Most of Saudi Arabia's partners, in fact, were reluctant to join the operation at all. Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan and Morocco limited their involvement in the war against the Houthis. Egypt and Pakistan refused to send ground troops to the fight. Sudan, by contrast, sent thousands of troops to Yemen, if only so that Riyadh would intercede on its behalf and persuade Washington to suspend the sanctions against it. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the only states in the coalition invested in the war.
But even they had different reasons for entering the conflict. Saudi Arabia's aims for Operation Decisive Storm and its successor, Operation Restoring Hope, were to crush the Houthis, sever their ties to Iran and secure the Saudi-Yemeni border in Jizan and Najran. The United Arab Emirates, on the other hand, had its own priorities in mind. Abu Dhabi, unlike Riyadh, isn't interested in driving the Houthis out of the Yemeni capital. Emirati leaders fear that doing so could give Islah — which they view as a threat to their own stability — a place in Yemen's political future. After making a perfunctory bid to train Yemeni troops for an offensive to retake Sanaa, Emirati forces turned their attention instead to southern Yemen. There, they worked to secure control of the Arabian coast and the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait, a critical conduit for international trade. The United Arab Emirates is also keen on preventing the Yemeni port of Aden from competing with the Jebel Ali port, near Dubai.
The War That Cannot Be Won
Because of their diverging interests in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have differing levels of commitment to the conflict, too.
Saudi Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman
Abu Dhabi's crown prince announced on Twitter in June 2016 that his country would end its military involvement in Yemen, though it would continue "monitoring political arrangements" and "empowering Yemenis in liberated areas." Saudi troops, meanwhile, have continued their fight in the state, pursuing goals that seem more distant by the day.
Saudi Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman knows the kingdom will probably never defeat the Houthis in Yemen. Saleh tried and failed to rout the movement six times between 2004 and 2010. And despite adamant declarations to the contrary, bin Salman wants to end Operation Restoring Hope. The young crown prince already has undertaken unprecedented reforms to modernize the Saudi economy, empower the country's women, and combat corruption and nepotism. But he has yet to overcome the legacy of blood and iron on which Saudi Arabia was built.
Hilal Khashan is a professor of political science at the American University of Beirut and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.
-
Reality Check
By Xander Snyder
In Yemen, Iranian-backed Houthis Face a Major Test
The rebel group’s coalition has collapsed, and Yemen’s future hangs in the balance.
From a humanitarian perspective, the Yemeni civil war is a tragedy that has cost thousands of lives. From a geopolitical perspective, it is yet another place where two of the Middle East’s main powers, Saudi Arabia and Iran, are competing for control.
Over the past few days, the crisis seems to have taken another turn. Former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh turned on his coalition partners, the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, after clashes in the capital, Sanaa, which the coalition had taken from the Saudi-backed government. Then, on Dec. 4, Saleh was killed amid fighting between his loyalists and his former supporters. The Houthis are now being tested, and the outcome will greatly influence the course of the war in Yemen.
How We Got Here
The most recent phase of the conflict in Yemen started in 2014 and involves two primary coalitions. On the one side is the now-defunct Saleh-Houthi coalition. On the other side is an alliance between Saudi Arabia and the government of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who came to power after Saleh abdicated in 2011 in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings. Hadi is currently in exile in Riyadh, which intervened in the war to prevent the Iranian-backed coalition from taking over the country.
Saleh ruled Yemen for over 30 years and had been a firm supporter of Saudi Arabia. Why, then, did he join in a coalition with a group backed by Iran, Saudi Arabia’s regional rival? He was forced from office by the uprising, and his former patron – Saudi Arabia – was unable to prevent it. Following an assassination attempt, he realized that Saudi Arabia couldn’t assure his safety and that working with the Houthis was the only way he could regain power. When Saleh joined forces with the Houthis, they quickly took over Sanaa in 2014. Saudi Arabia intervened on behalf of the internationally recognized government led by Hadi to prevent the newly formed Houthi-Saleh coalition from toppling the government and turning the country into an Iranian proxy.
(click to enlarge)
But last week, Saleh broke his alliance with the Houthis and stated publicly on Dec. 2 that he’d be open to discussions with the Saudis. Though this wasn’t wholly unexpected given Saleh’s past ties to Saudi Arabia, abandoning the rebel coalition would have left the Houthis isolated. Just days later, the Houthis assassinated Saleh, calling into question whatever deal with Saudi leaders that Saleh had in mind.
In Sanaa, the former Houthi-Saleh coalition partners began fighting. Hadi, recognizing an opportunity, ordered his forces on Dec. 4 to move on the capital while the Houthis were preoccupied. Since Saleh was instrumental in enabling the Houthis to so quickly take Sanaa from the government, the collapse of the coalition and Saleh’s subsequent death has created division within the former rebel coalition, and Hadi hopes to exploit it before the Houthis can recover.
Saleh was not just a skilled political operator – he was also a top general in Yemen’s military. He undoubtedly traveled with a security entourage. The Houthis’ ability to quickly locate him, penetrate his security and kill him is a sign that the Houthis – and therefore the Iranians – have established a firm grip on power, with robust intelligence capabilities, in part of the country. But with the rebel coalition now divided, Iran’s proxy faces a serious threat to its hold over Sanaa and, therefore, a major part of Yemen.
Iran’s Response
In response to the turmoil, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Yemen’s domestic problems “should be resolved through dialogue to prevent foreign enemies from abusing the Yemeni nation.” There are two ways to interpret Rouhani’s comment. First, he may be concerned that the Houthis’ – and therefore Iran’s – position in Yemen has become seriously challenged, so much so that he might be willing to engage in dialogue. The second interpretation is that Rouhani simply wants to begin negotiations but intends to keep the fighting going to gain as much leverage in the negotiations as possible. Ongoing fighting and negotiations would enable Iran to pursue its objectives in Yemen in the diplomatic and military spheres at the same time.
Houthi rebel fighters are seen riding an armored vehicle outside the residence of former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh in Sanaa on Dec. 4, 2017. MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images
Iran’s goals in Yemen are easier to achieve than Saudi Arabia’s. Saudi Arabia wants to rid the Arabian Peninsula of Iranian influence, which requires eliminating Iranian proxies in Yemen, a much harder task than simply keeping the war raging to force Saudi Arabia to divert its resources and manpower to Yemen. An ideal outcome for Iran would be a resolution that incorporates the Houthis into some form of legitimized government, similar to Hezbollah’s arrangement in Lebanon. Failing that, Iran would be happy to keep Saudi Arabia distracted by fanning the flames of war on its southern border.
With the opposition now divided, two critical questions remain regarding Iran’s position in Yemen: Are Saleh’s forces strong enough to continue to pose a threat to the Houthis in Sanaa? And are Hadi’s forces powerful enough to retake the capital? Estimates of both parties’ troop levels are scarce, and some are more reliable than others. In 2011, Houthi leader Abdul-Malek al-Houthi claimed that the group had 100,000 fighters. But estimates from the International Institute for Strategic Studies are significantly lower. In 2017, IISS estimated that there were roughly 20,000 insurgents in Yemen, including the Houthis and the Yemeni Republican Guard, which was controlled by Saleh loyalists. (It is unclear whether other forces loyal to Saleh were included in these figures.) IISS estimated the size of Yemen’s army, including its militia, at between 10,000 and 20,000. Saudi Arabia provides air support and military advisers for the Yemeni army. But the Houthis also showed a degree of sophistication when they fired a ballistic missile, almost certainly made by Iran, at Riyadh last month. That the rebel coalition and the army are so similar in size explains why Saleh’s changing sides could alter the balance between the two sides.
If Hadi and his coalition are able to retake Sanaa, it would be a sign that the collapse of the Saleh-Houthi alliance has seriously weakened Iran’s position in Yemen. However, it would by no means portend an end to the war. Iran does not need to hold Sanaa to keep Saudi Arabia tied down in Yemen; it just needs to keep the war going. On the other hand, if the Houthis are able to eliminate Saleh’s loyalists from Sanaa and repel an attack by Hadi’s forces, it would be a clear sign that Iran’s power in Yemen has cemented, and that Saudi Arabia will not be able to easily uproot it.
-
U.S. Sends Al Qaeda’s Arabian Peninsula Headquarters $768 Mil in Humanitarian Aid
DECEMBER 20, 2017
The U.S. government keeps sending an Islamic nation that serves as an Al Qaeda breeding ground hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid. The cash—$768 million since October 2016—flows through the famously corrupt U.S. Agency of International Development (USAID), which has a monstrous budget and little oversight. The money is reportedly helping to counter a humanitarian crisis in Yemen, the headquarters of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). In its Country Reports on Terrorism, the State Department reveals that AQAP militants carried out hundreds of attacks including suicide bombers, vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), ambushes, kidnappings and targeted assassinations. The media has also documented this for years with one in-depth report confirming that “Yemen has emerged as the breeding grounds for some of the most high-profile plans to attack the U.S. homeland.”
Additionally, dozens of terrorists freed from the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba have joined Al Qaeda in Yemen. Among them is an Al Qaeda chief who masterminded a U.S. Embassy bombing after getting released, according to a mainstream newspaper. His name is Said Ali al-Shihri and after leaving Gitmo he became an Al Qaeda deputy chief in Yemen and he organized a deadly bombing of the United States Embassy in Yemen’s capital. The former captive was also involved in car bombings outside the American Embassy that killed 16 people. Remember that the convicted terrorist who planned to blow up an American passenger jet over Detroit on Christmas in 2009 trained in Yemen and the plot was organized by Al Qaeda leaders in the Middle Eastern Arab country. A recent study published by the RAND Corporation concludes that the most significant threat to the United States comes from terrorist groups operating in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
So why does the U.S. government continue giving Yemen huge chunks of taxpayer dollars? Because it is “gravely concerned about a worsening humanitarian situation” in the Islamic nation, according to a statement issued this month by USAID. The document was released to announce a recent $130 million in “emergency food assistance to Yemen.” The U.S. government has determined that “protracted conflict” has created the “world’s largest food security emergency” in Yemen as well as the “world’s worst cholera outbreak.” More than 17 million people are at risk of severe hunger or starvation, according to the agency. The U.S. is also using military force to crack down on Yemen’s Al Qaeda problem. Earlier this month U.S. airstrikes killed five Al Qaeda militants, including one of the group’s key leaders, Mujahid al-Adani.
USAID is well known for gushing out cash with no follow up or oversight to assure the money is spent appropriately and the Yemen allocations are probably no exception. A perfect example is that millions of dollars in malaria drugs provided to Africa are stolen each year and sold on the black market. The problem has gotten so out of control that USAID launched “malaria hotlines” to offer cash rewards for information about the illicit operations that have fleeced American taxpayers out of tens of millions of dollars. Through a variety of programs, the U.S. government has spent billions of dollars to combat malaria in Africa in the last few years. One USAID program alone has dedicated north of $72 million since 2011 to give 19 African countries free malaria drugs, $15 million in 2016 alone. The agency has long acknowledged that malaria drugs financed by American taxpayers are regularly stolen in Africa. “This is not the first report of theft or illegal diversion,” USAID admitted in a statement years ago.
USAID has committed other atrocities with public funds and Judicial Watch has launched investigations to uncover details. Earlier this year Judicial Watch obtained records showing that USAID spent millions of taxpayer dollars to destabilize the democratically elected, center-right government in Macedonia by colluding with leftwing billionaire philanthropist George Soros. The scheme was masterminded by Barack Obama’s U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia, Jess L. Baily, who worked behind the scenes with Soros’ Open Society Foundation to funnel large sums of American dollars for the cause, constituting an interference of the U.S. Ambassador in domestic political affairs in violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Judicial Watch’s ongoing probe has so far revealed that USAID earmarked at least $9.5 million to intervene in the Balkan nation’s governmental affairs, which deviates from its mission of providing humanitarian assistance.
-
U.S. Weighs Expanding Military Role in Yemen War
United Arab Emirates seeks direct U.S. help to capture Red Sea port from Iran-backed Houthi fighters
Yemeni forces backed by a Saudi-led coalition in the western province of Hodeidah in late May.
Yemeni forces backed by a Saudi-led coalition in the western province of Hodeidah in late May. Photo: EPA/Shutterstock
By Dion Nissenbaum
June 3, 2018 6:19 p.m. ET
21 COMMENTS
WASHINGTON—The Trump administration is weighing an appeal from the United Arab Emirates for direct U.S. support to seize Yemen’s main port for humanitarian aid from Iranian-backed Houthi fighters, according to U.S. officials, a move they worry could have catastrophic effects on the country.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has asked for a quick assessment of the UAE’s plea for assistance such as surveillance drone flights to help a Saudi-led coalition retake Hodeidah, which currently serves as a vital lifeline for the country’s 29 million residents, U.S. officials said.
U.A.E. and Saudi Arabian officials have assured the U.S. that they won’t try to seize the Red Sea port until they get backing from Washington, American officials said. But there is growing concern in the Trump administration that fighting around the city could spiral out of control and force Washington’s hand. Yemeni fighters backed by the coalition are battling Houthis near the city.
“We continue to have a lot of concerns about a Hodeidah operation,” said one senior U.S. official. “We are not 100% comfortable that, even if the coalition did launch an attack, that they would be able to do it cleanly and avoid a catastrophic incident.”
The debate over increasing U.S. support to the U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia is competing for the attention of top administration officials working furiously to prepare for the planned summit with North Korea in Singapore on June 12. But escalating military operations around the Yemeni port have triggered new urgency in Washington.
The U.S. and the Saudi-led coalition have agreed that U.A.E. forces overseeing military operations won’t enter the port in the near-term so that the United Nations’ new special envoy on Yemen, Martin Griffiths, can try to jump start moribund diplomatic efforts to end the fighting, according to one Arab official.
But there is broad concern that Yemeni forces aligned with the Saudi-led coalition will act on their own.
Top Yemen specialists in the U.S. administration are expected to meet on Monday to discuss what to do. Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., which provides the main military backing for the Yemeni forces working to take Hodeidah, have long sought U.S. support for the operation.
Last year, the Saudi-led coalition unsuccessfully sought to secure American intelligence, surveillance and direct support from elite U.S. military forces for an assault on Hodeidah, former U.S. administration officials said.
Special forces from the U.A.E. and U.S. work together inside Yemen to target al Qaeda and Islamic State fighters while U.S. drones carry out airstrikes. The U.S. also sells weapons to the Gulf countries and helps to refuel Saudi and U.A.E. warplanes that carry out airstrikes—a move that concerns some U.S. lawmakers who worry about American culpability for civilian deaths.
For now, key administration officials involved in the debate harbor reservations about expanding American military involvement in Yemen, according to U.S. officials. But some see value in helping.
“We have folks who are frustrated and ready to say: ‘Let’s do this. We’ve been flirting with this for a long time. Something needs to change the dynamic, and if we help the Emiratis do it better, this could be good,’” the senior U.S. official said.
Some administration officials also are increasingly frustrated that military and diplomatic efforts both have bogged down, which is fueling efforts to curtail U.S. support for the fighting. U.S. lawmakers are looking at ways to cut off the sale of precision-guided missiles used by Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. in Yemen.
President Barack Obama halted the sale of such “smart bombs” to Saudi Arabia in 2016, at the end of his administration. But the new administration lifted the ban soon after President Donald Trump took office, and officials are seeking congressional support for a new weapons sale to Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.
Airstrikes by the Saudi-led coalition have killed more than 4,000 civilians in Yemen, according to U.N. estimates.
Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. have emerged as vital allies of Mr. Trump. They joined the U.S.-led coalition that has pushed Islamic State to the brink of defeat in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is also playing a central role in the Trump administration’s undisclosed plan for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The war in Yemen draws high interest in Washington because of its strategic importance. Trump administration officials worry about Iran’s military support for the Houthis, who have fired an increasing number of advanced Iranian-made missiles into neighboring Saudi Arabia. Iran denies providing military aid to the Houthis.
U.S. officials also worry that the Houthis increasingly will threaten ships passing through the vital shipping lanes off the Yemeni coast—a fear that was reinforced last month when a missile hit a Turkish ship delivering humanitarian aid, causing minor damage. The White House issued an unusual statement denouncing the attack and blaming Iran.
Eighty percent of commercial and humanitarian supplies flows through Hodeidah, a central gateway. Saudi leaders routinely accuse Iran of using the port to smuggle missiles into Yemen—a charge Tehran rejects. U.S. officials have characterized the Saudi concerns as overblown—especially when balanced with the need to keep the aid lines open.
But the forces backed by the Saudi-led coalition are quickly closing in on the port, and they have vowed to seize it sooner rather than later. Aid groups say the operation could be disastrous in a country where millions of people are on the brink of famine.
“The push for Hodeidah is likely to exacerbate an already catastrophic security situation in Yemen,” said François Moreillon, head of the International Committee of the Red Cross delegation in Yemen
Top officials from the U.S., the U.K., Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. recently met in the region to discuss the looming crisis.
U.S. and U.N. officials also worry about the impact on tenuous diplomatic moves to end the war. American officials are increasingly pushing the Saudi-led coalition to find a political end to the fighting.
Mr. Griffiths, the U.N.’s special envoy on Yemen, is supposed to present his proposal for resurrecting moribund peace talks to the U.N. Security Council in the next two weeks and has publicly warned that an attack on Hodeidah “would take peace off the table.”
“We are all very concerned about the possible humanitarian consequences of a battle for Hodeidah,” he said.
Write to Dion Nissenbaum at dion.nissenbaum@wsj.com
-
By Xander Snyder
In Yemen, Cracks in the Saudi Alliance Begin to Show
The UAE doesn’t need a unified Yemen to secure its interests, but Saudi Arabia does.
If or when Yemen’s civil war draws to a close, another one may well be waiting. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have different end games in mind, despite fighting in the same coalition against the Iranian-sponsored Houthis. In fact, their shared interest in Yemen begins and ends with eliminating, or at least curbing, Iran’s influence on the Arabian Peninsula. Their diverging needs already have led to clashes between Emirati- and Saudi-backed forces in Yemen. In January, for example, a fight broke out between members of the Southern Transitional Council, a secessionist group supported by the UAE, and forces loyal to President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, head of Yemen’s internationally recognized – and Saudi-approved – government. And on Oct. 3, the STC took aim at the exiled president once again, calling for an uprising against his government. The latest incident highlighted the cracks in the Saudi-UAE alliance, which will probably only grow as the Yemeni conflict continues.
Different Goals
Understanding why the STC and government forces are beginning to turn on each other after fighting on the same side of the civil war requires an understanding of their patrons’ interests in Yemen. The Houthis, an Iranian proxy group, pose an immediate threat to Saudi Arabia, which shares a border with Yemen. To prevent a hostile regime from taking power just across its southern boundary, the kingdom is working to install a more sympathetic government in Yemen. Doing so, however, requires that the state remain unified. With that goal in mind, Saudi Arabia has joined forces with Islah, a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate that also wants to maintain Yemen’s unity.
The UAE, on the other hand, is concerned less with the proximity of the Houthis – after all, it does not border Yemen – than with their access to critical shipping channels in the region. The Houthi presence in the port of Hodeida puts sea lanes in the Red Sea and Suez Canal, which Saudi Arabia and the UAE depend on in their energy trade with North America and Europe, at risk. It also jeopardizes the naval bases that the UAE has established along the Horn of Africa during the course of the Yemeni conflict. (The ports in Assab, Eritrea, and Berbera, Somaliland, offer the UAE some flexibility in case Iran interrupts its trade through the Persian Gulf.) To maintain supply routes to the bases, Emirati forces need control of Yemen’s southern coast, especially the port of Aden, and its western shores on the strategic Bab el-Mandeb strait.
(click to enlarge)
Diverging Strategies
Put simply, the UAE doesn’t need a unified Yemen to secure its interests, but Saudi Arabia does. The UAE is consequently reluctant to stick its neck out to help Saudi Arabia take territory outside southern and western Yemen and content to let the STC push for secession. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, is willing to pursue the goal of a unified Yemen even if it means working with Islah, an organization that, in the Emirati view, presents nearly as great a threat as the Houthis do. Their differing objectives in the conflict will put increasing strain on relations between the two Gulf states.
(click to enlarge)
It’s difficult to tell at this point whether the UAE is actively encouraging the STC’s opposition to Hadi’s government or simply allowing it. But it doesn’t really matter: The UAE is after control over southern Yemen – whether as a region or as an independent entity – and it already has the forces in place to accomplish that goal. Since the UAE has been far more active on the ground than has Saudi Arabia, which has provided primarily funding and air support, southern Yemen is rife with UAE and UAE-friendly forces, while northern Yemen is still a Houthi stronghold. Saudi Arabia may have to fend for itself in northern Yemen if the Houthis keep focusing their attacks on its southern border, and could have to send in more of its own ground forces or more East African allied forces. As long as the Houthis stay out of southern Yemen and the western coast, and as long as Saudi Arabia itself seems to be holding up, the UAE will be satisfied.
What remains to be seen is whether the alliance between Saudi Arabia and the UAE could survive the split that the STC is advocating. The two clearly share some interests in the region – such as protecting maritime flow – but the war appears to be approaching a phase in which they are jostling for position, anticipating a time when the Houthi presence is greatly diminished, if not eliminated. More broadly, the question remains whether the divisions between Saudi Arabia and the UAE will stay confined to the Yemeni civil war, or whether they will seep out into other areas of potential competition.
-
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/aramroston/mercenaries-assassination-us-yemen-uae-spear-golan-dahlan
-
Why Iran Might Cut Its Losses in Yemen
Iran is overstretched, and the war in Yemen may not be worth fighting for much longer.
Xander Snyder |November 8, 2018
Over the past three years, there have been many attempts to find a resolution to the war in Yemen. None have been successful. In September, for example, U.N.-brokered peace talks collapsed when the Iran-backed Houthi rebels declined to send a representative. But now, it seems conditions in Iran might force that country to cut its losses and limit its involvement there.
Iran is under serious pressure at home right now due to two factors. The first is U.S. oil and gas sanctions, which went into effect Monday. The regime in Tehran has already faced significant opposition resulting from the country’s economic struggles this year, and the sanctions will likely compound the problem. With declining finances, Iran’s funding of operations in Yemen might divert finances from elsewhere and cause further social strain domestically.
It’s unclear how much money Iran is spending on Yemen, but it has supplied its allies there with munitions, surface-to-air missiles and surface-to-surface ballistic missiles. According to reports, Iran spends nearly $15 billion per year on defense, though many believe the real figure is much higher. Annually, it spends an estimated $6 billion-$20 billion in Syria, $1 billion on Hezbollah and $100 million on Hamas. If these figures are accurate, its total defense expenditure would have to be much higher than $15 billion.
Much of the internal opposition in Iran has focused on its involvement in conflicts abroad and the need to invest more at home. There have been numerous signs that Iranians are increasingly frustrated with the economic and political situation in the country. Nationwide protests erupted repeatedly throughout 2018, and the declining value of the currency has made daily necessities increasingly expensive. Some Iranians have even taken to social media to apologize for the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 – a sign that they’re not afraid of regime reprisals.
The second factor is the looming threat of an Israeli war with Hezbollah, a staunch Iranian ally. On Nov. 1, Israel warned Lebanon, through France, that it must take action against Hezbollah’s production of rockets in Lebanese factories, likely an attempt to publicly show that it has made every effort to try to avert war. Hezbollah has received rockets from Iran for years and, more important, has recently boasted about getting precision missiles from Tehran, a far more serious threat to Israel than artillery rockets. Israel knows from past experience that, in the case of war, airstrikes alone wouldn’t be enough to eliminate these weapons. Ground operations, therefore, may be required, and this could substantially compromise Iran’s position in southern Syria. Lebanon and Syria are ultimately more critical to Iranian interests than Yemen is, and if a conflict in Lebanon is really in the offing, Tehran likely won’t want to continue spending its resources in Yemen.
Iran also faces a rising threat from insurgents at home. Attacks by Iranian Kurdish militants in western Iran have increased this year. In October, 29 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps were killed during a parade in Khuzestan, a strategic western province that shares a porous border with Iraq. In the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, Sunni insurgents abducted several IRGC members and are holding them in Pakistan. The Iranians have blamed Saudi Arabia for the attack, and though Iran has a tendency to blame Riyadh and other adversaries for its problems, this charge is credible. Indeed, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has threatened in the past to take the Saudi fight against Tehran to Iranian territory. Riyadh’s investments in development projects in Gwadar, Pakistan, near Iran’s eastern border, can also be seen as an attempt to increase its presence closer to Iran.
Iran, therefore, is overstretched and facing threats from all directions. There are signs, however, that other major players in the war in Yemen may be gearing up for a cease-fire or, at least, a de-escalation in the fighting. The Saudi-led coalition in Yemen is bolstering its offensive against the strategic city of Hodeida. In late October, it sent 10,000 additional troops, including Sudanese forces, to assist in the assault on the city, which began on Nov. 2. The coalition claims that it’s taking territory around Hodeida. Pictures, videos and other information posted on social media appear to corroborate this, showing that coalition forces and their allies are advancing, albeit with resistance, toward the city. Reported casualty figures for Saudi airstrikes are higher than they have been for previous Saudi attacks. On Nov. 4, Yemen’s official Saba news agency also reported the coalition cut off the Houthis’ main supply line to Hodeida, which a Houthi spokesperson denied.
(click to enlarge)
We would expect to see a new offensive launched right before another round of serious negotiations. During such talks, parties often try to improve their bargaining positions by acquiring more territory. And it’s hard to believe that the timing of this offensive – beginning just three days before sanctions on Iran came into effect and around the time that the U.S. called for a cease-fire in Yemen – is a coincidence.
Another sign that more serious talks may be ahead came from Pakistan. Following his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan stated that Pakistan is willing to act as a mediator between Saudi Arabia and Iran, later saying that informal talks have already begun. Iran, for its part, said it would welcome Pakistan as a mediator. These statements, combined with the challenges facing Iran and the intensifying offensive around Hodeida, may indicate that the chances for a settlement are improving.
-
Winning.
-
U.S.: The Senate Moves to End U.S. Involvement in Yemen
(Stratfor)
The Big Picture
Maintaining a close accord with Saudi Arabia has been an important part of U.S. policy in the Middle East for decades, but that partnership is now facing harsh criticism over human rights violations and the humanitarian cost of the Saudi-led coalition's involvement in Yemen's civil war. A recent vote from U.S. legislators demonstrates growing opposition to U.S. support for Saudi Arabia, but the proclivities of U.S. President Donald Trump, as well as the U.S. desire to contain Iran in the Middle East, will keep the two countries close.
What Happened
U.S. legislators have taken their greatest action yet to end U.S. involvement in Yemen's civil war. With a vote of 63 to 37, the U.S. Senate chose on Nov. 28 to move forward with a bill that would limit U.S. support for the Saudi-led military campaign against Houthi rebels in Yemen. The White House has already prepared the groundwork to veto the bill – which must still pass the House of Representatives – by issuing a carefully worded statement that the United States is not engaged in hostilities in Yemen.
Why It Matters
The Senate vote is a rebuke of the White House's approach to maintaining relations with Saudi Arabia. The resolution was originally introduced in March, but it was defeated by a vote of 55 to 44. That it has now passed shows the growing tide of congressional displeasure over the growing accord between the White House and Riyadh, particularly after the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in early October. While the vote itself does reflect some of the growing public awareness of the humanitarian cost of Yemen's conflict, it also represents a deepening divide between the White House and Congress over the authority to declare war, approve arms sales and direct foreign policy.
As far as changes to the relationship between Riyadh and Washington are concerned, legislators have already submitted numerous other pieces of legislation – or are preparing to do so – that would more directly impact arms sales to Saudi Arabia. However, the White House will continue to defend the economic and strategic value of maintaining a close military and security relationship with Saudi Arabia, partially to maintain jobs related to the arms industry. Saudi Arabia, which is the United States' single largest arms customer, is aware of the need to defend itself in this debate, spurring Riyadh to confirm its intent to purchase the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system for $15 billion on the same day as the Senate vote.
Background
Yemen's civil war has pit Houthi rebels against the Saudi-led coalition for over three years. Numerous attempts at peace talks have fallen apart as both sides have continually chosen to fight instead of engage in negotiations for a political settlement. According to a Sky News report, a senior British official has claimed that Yemeni peace talks will be held next week in Sweden, which reflects the growing political pressure currently pushing both sides toward talks. Houthi sources said Nov. 28 that a rebel delegation is tentatively slated to arrive in Sweden on Dec. 3. And on Nov. 28, the U.S. and Saudi ambassadors to Yemen met in Mukalla, Yemen, on the sidelines of a military ceremony, indicating that discussions are occurring with southern leaders, which is a difficult but necessary prerequisite for talks.
-
On US Involvement in the War in Yemen
Dec 13, 2018
By Xander Snyder
Summary
Last month, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution that could limit U.S. military involvement in the war in Yemen. There’s been intensifying criticism of the humanitarian impact of the war and pressure on the Saudi-led coalition to end the fighting there. But many also see the Senate resolution as a response to Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. The anger over his death and the brutal way in which he was killed has placed increasing pressure on governments and political leaders in many countries to take action against the Saudi regime.
This puts Washington in a tough spot. Given that the U.S. is already overstretched militarily, it increasingly needs to rely on allies like Saudi Arabia to secure its interests in the Middle East. So any attempts to limit U.S. cooperation with Saudi Arabia and its efforts in Yemen has the potential to hamper relations with a key partner and might actually block the U.S. from pursuing its objectives in the region. This raises a critical geopolitical question: To what degree can state institutions inhibit a country’s ability to pursue its imperatives in the short term? This Deep Dive will seek to answer this question as it relates to U.S. involvement in the war in Yemen.
U.S. Objectives in Yemen
In the U.S, the killing of Jamal Khashoggi in early October drew fresh scrutiny of the Saudi kingdom as well as the coalition it leads against Houthi insurgents in Yemen. Some politicians felt the need to respond to the public shock and indignation over Khashoggi’s death by limiting the Trump administration’s ability to collaborate with Riyadh. The result was the resolution that passed in the Senate 63-37 and could eventually force the U.S. to withdraw some of the aid it has provided to the Saudi-led coalition.
But U.S. support for the Saudis in Yemen isn’t just about the war in Yemen. The U.S. has long been concerned about a regional hegemon emerging in the Middle East. (On a broader level, one of the United States’ key imperatives is to prevent a regional hegemon from emerging in any part of the world because it could force Washington to redirect resources away from land-based military capabilities toward developing a stronger navy so it can maintain its dominance of the high seas.) The U.S. is concerned that Iran’s expanding influence in places like Iraq and Syria could move it closer to being able to dominate the Middle East. This is a pivotal reason why the U.S. got involved in Yemen – to make sure Iran, which supports the Houthi rebels in their fight against the Saudi-backed government, doesn’t hold extensive influence in yet another Middle Eastern country.
But the U.S. has learned over the past 15 years that it can’t win wars alone, and it has to be more selective in choosing the conflicts in which it engages. It must, therefore, rely on regional allies to help achieve its security interests. Restraining Iran, then, requires the U.S. to cooperate with countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel, so it can deploy its own forces only on a limited basis. Yemen is of critical concern for the Saudis; they share a border, and Riyadh can’t afford to let its archrival to gain a foothold there.
The Power of Public Opinion
The Senate resolution, then, seems to aim to limit the United States’ ability to work with one of its key partners. But on closer examination, the resolution isn’t nearly as significant a constraint as it first appears. At most, it would curtail low-level U.S. support of Saudi actions against the Houthis in Yemen. And that’s assuming the resolution moves past the next stages. The vote in November was only on whether the resolution should be sent for further debate and then to a second and third vote in the Senate. Even if it passes the final hurdle there, the White House has said the president would veto it. (Though there’s a similar bill in the House of Representatives that couldn’t be vetoed by the president.) By voting for the resolution, then, senators were able to show concern over the issue without actually forcing any change in policy.
Moreover, the resolution isn’t exactly clear on what forces or assets the U.S. would need to withdraw. It states, “Congress hereby directs the President to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities in or affecting the Republic of Yemen, except United States Armed Forces engaged in operations directed at al Qaeda or associated forces … .” In other words, U.S. forces engaged with al-Qaida or associated entities wouldn’t need to be pulled out of Yemen. So the U.S. could maintain some limited engagement and still be compliant with the resolution.
A key question, however, is why domestic institutions would want to constrain U.S. actions abroad in the first place. This is where national identity and domestic politics play a critical role in geopolitics. National identity helps shape citizens’ perception of right and wrong, which in turn can influence leaders’ actions and the policies they promote – or at least the ones they promote in public. Sometimes, this means a country’s actions abroad are genuinely intended to protect the values its citizens deem important. Other times, politicians just try to convince the public that the country’s allies act in a way that is consistent with its own values, even if they don’t, so that public discourse doesn’t interfere with a country’s pursuit of its national interests. Franklin Roosevelt, for example, famously referred to Josef Stalin as “Uncle Joe” when it was essential that the two countries join forces to defeat Nazi Germany, despite the brutality with which Stalin seized and held on to power.
But when an ally openly commits an act that violates a country’s values, leaders may be forced to respond in a way that at least appears to punish that ally to appease the public. Often, the outrage will pass, the issue will be replaced by some other topic that occupies the media’s attention, and leaders will revert back to their prior course. But if that act remains in the spotlight for a longer period of time, as was the case with the Vietnam War, then it can create longer-term constraints on a state’s actions abroad.
In some cases, the public isn’t driven only by a desire to defend their values but also by their own self-interest, which is an even more powerful motivator for change. During the Vietnam war, for example, the majority of Americans opposed the war not just because they thought it was unjust but also because the draft may have forced them to risk their own lives in the conflict. A country’s pursuit of its interests, then, can be more limited when citizens are directly affected by the policies required to pursue those interests.
In the case of Jamal Khashoggi, the public indignation at Saudi Arabia is solely values-driven, since the American public was not directly affected by the Khashoggi murder. The same goes for the war in Yemen. Aside from a very small contingent of special forces, American lives have not been put at risk to fight this conflict. It’s doubtful, then, that the American public will continue to focus on this issue for long enough to substantially derail the United States’ relationship with Saudi Arabia.
It’s also worth noting that this isn’t the first time this resolution has come up for a vote in the Senate. Senators voted 55-44 against the resolution in March. According to many in the media, the Khashoggi killing was the primary reason the Senate had such a change of heart in just eight months. But other Iran-related developments have occurred since March that may have also contributed to the decision. Iran has experienced a number of setbacks domestically – including the reimposition of U.S. sanctions, a plunging currency, nationwide protests against rising consumer prices and continued insurgent attacks in Kurdish and Arab regions – that may weaken its ability to continue waging war in Yemen. Senators may thus see this as an opportunity to pull American involvement there without giving Iran the upper hand.
Measuring U.S. Involvement in Yemen
Whether the Senate resolution has any impact on the war in Yemen or on U.S.-Saudi relations depends in large part on how much support the U.S. is providing to the Saudi coalition. And the answer is, not much. The U.S. provided refueling support for coalition aircraft until mid-November, when the White House decided to end aerial refueling for Saudi operations ahead of a House bill that would have restricted U.S. involvement in the war. But the refueling support had little impact on the coalition, since Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (Riyadh’s main coalition ally) both have air refueling capabilities themselves.
U.S. ground support in the war is also extremely limited. In 2017, it was reported that about a dozen Green Berets were stationed on the Saudi side of the Saudi-Yemeni border to locate and destroy ballistic missiles fired by the Houthis into Saudi Arabia. Some have estimated the total number of U.S. military personnel deployed to Saudi Arabia to support the coalition at about 50. These forces are reportedly providing the Saudis with intelligence to help them find targets for airstrikes. But were Riyadh to lose this support, it wouldn’t be a huge setback for the coalition.
Thus, the Senate resolution wouldn’t be much of a check on U.S. involvement in Yemen because the U.S. isn’t very involved there anyway. Plus, some areas of U.S. engagement in the country fall outside the scope of the resolution. In late November, Saudi Arabia signed a $15 billion deal with the U.S. for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-missile system, a more sophisticated system than the U.S.-made Patriot batteries Saudi Arabia currently has. This deal would remain in place even if the Senate resolution forces U.S. special forces to end their support of the coalition. The U.S. also has an ongoing campaign in Yemen against al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, which would not be affected by the Senate resolution.
Saudi Arabia’s Perspective
For Saudi Arabia, the U.S. rhetoric against the Saudi coalition in Yemen, as well as the anger over the Khashoggi affair, is tolerable so long as it doesn’t meaningfully affect Saudi Arabia’s interests in Yemen.
Riyadh has two goals in Yemen. First, it wants to eliminate or at least decrease Houthi missile attacks on Riyadh and other Saudi cities launched from across the border in Yemen. Second, it must prevent the Iran-backed Houthis from securing control of the government or establishing a large semi-autonomous region within Yemen. (The Houthis seized control of the capital, Sanaa, in 2014.)
(click to enlarge)
Riyadh has thus been supporting the Yemeni government in its quest to retake rebel-held parts of the country. This includes Hodeida, a strategic port city on the coast of the Red Sea. The Saudi coalition launched a new offensive there just before peace talks between the Yemeni government and various rebel groups began in Sweden on Dec. 6. Indeed, it’s common for opposing sides in a conflict to launch offensives before negotiations in an effort to gain leverage and strengthen their bargaining positions. So far, the coalition has captured some territory around the city, including areas to its east, a hospital and a large portion of a road that leads to the city.
Iranian Interests
As mentioned previously, one of the main U.S. goals in Yemen is to contain Iran. But even if a resolution manages to limit U.S. involvement there, Washington has other tools, such as sanctions, that aren’t nearly as controversial as engaging in a war that has had such a severe humanitarian cost. It can also lean on its allies in the region to limit Iranian actions. So the resolution really isn’t much of a constraint on the United States’ ability to keep the Iranians in check.
But containing Iran in Yemen really comes down to how committed the Iranians are to supporting the Houthis. After failing to show up to peace talks in Geneva in September, the Houthis’ participation in talks in December indicate they may be under greater pressure now than they were just a couple months ago. Still, it doesn’t seem that the war will be ending any time soon. So Iran’s continued invovlement in Yemen will come down to two issues. The first is how much money the war is costing Tehran. While it’s hard to find exact figures on its expenditures in Yemen, estimates hover in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars. (Iran has a total defense budget of $15 billion.) But Iran’s financial resources are stretched to the limit, and it’s already faced resistance throughout this year from average Iranians anger over the plummeting currency and rising consumer prices. The government in Tehran, therefore, may be looking for areas it can cut its costs, and Yemen might be one of them.
The second issue is whether Tehran is willing to decrease its support for the Houthis in exchange for sanctions relief. This depends on whether the economic benefits of sanctions relief outweigh the value of tying down Saudi Arabia in Yemen so it can’t threaten Iranian interests elsewhere. For Iran, Yemen is less important strategically than Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, mostly due to its geography – there are logistical challenges in resupplying its forces and proxies in Yemen and it doesn’t offer Iran access to the wider Middle East because it’s isolated on the southern edge of the Arabian Peninsula. Tehran may be willing, therefore, to reduce its engagement in Yemen in return for concessions on sanctions that may be able to release some of the economic pressure it’s facing at home.
(click to enlarge)
Saudi Arabia knows that whatever happens in the U.S. Senate, Washington and Riyadh are working toward the same goal: eliminating the Iranian presence from Saudi Arabia’s southern border. The Senate resolution, therefore, won’t have a major impact on U.S.-Saudi relations. Both countries are still on the same page strategically, and the resolution is mostly about politicians needing to appear sensitive to their constituents’ concerns, but it won’t place any meaningful limits on the United States’ pursuit of its interests in the Middle East.
The post On US Involvement in the War in Yemen appeared first on Geopolitical Futures.
-
Why Iran Might Cut Its Losses in Yemen
Iran is overstretched, and the war in Yemen may not be worth fighting for much longer.
Xander Snyder |November 8, 2018
Save to PDF
Print
Tweet
Share on Facebook
Recipient e-mail
Your name
Your message
Over the past three years, there have been many attempts to find a resolution to the war in Yemen. None have been successful. In September, for example, U.N.-brokered peace talks collapsed when the Iran-backed Houthi rebels declined to send a representative. But now, it seems conditions in Iran might force that country to cut its losses and limit its involvement there.
Iran is under serious pressure at home right now due to two factors. The first is U.S. oil and gas sanctions, which went into effect Monday. The regime in Tehran has already faced significant opposition resulting from the country’s economic struggles this year, and the sanctions will likely compound the problem. With declining finances, Iran’s funding of operations in Yemen might divert finances from elsewhere and cause further social strain domestically.
It’s unclear how much money Iran is spending on Yemen, but it has supplied its allies there with munitions, surface-to-air missiles and surface-to-surface ballistic missiles. According to reports, Iran spends nearly $15 billion per year on defense, though many believe the real figure is much higher. Annually, it spends an estimated $6 billion-$20 billion in Syria, $1 billion on Hezbollah and $100 million on Hamas. If these figures are accurate, its total defense expenditure would have to be much higher than $15 billion.
Much of the internal opposition in Iran has focused on its involvement in conflicts abroad and the need to invest more at home. There have been numerous signs that Iranians are increasingly frustrated with the economic and political situation in the country. Nationwide protests erupted repeatedly throughout 2018, and the declining value of the currency has made daily necessities increasingly expensive. Some Iranians have even taken to social media to apologize for the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 – a sign that they’re not afraid of regime reprisals.
The second factor is the looming threat of an Israeli war with Hezbollah, a staunch Iranian ally. On Nov. 1, Israel warned Lebanon, through France, that it must take action against Hezbollah’s production of rockets in Lebanese factories, likely an attempt to publicly show that it has made every effort to try to avert war. Hezbollah has received rockets from Iran for years and, more important, has recently boasted about getting precision missiles from Tehran, a far more serious threat to Israel than artillery rockets. Israel knows from past experience that, in the case of war, airstrikes alone wouldn’t be enough to eliminate these weapons. Ground operations, therefore, may be required, and this could substantially compromise Iran’s position in southern Syria. Lebanon and Syria are ultimately more critical to Iranian interests than Yemen is, and if a conflict in Lebanon is really in the offing, Tehran likely won’t want to continue spending its resources in Yemen.
Iran also faces a rising threat from insurgents at home. Attacks by Iranian Kurdish militants in western Iran have increased this year. In October, 29 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps were killed during a parade in Khuzestan, a strategic western province that shares a porous border with Iraq. In the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, Sunni insurgents abducted several IRGC members and are holding them in Pakistan. The Iranians have blamed Saudi Arabia for the attack, and though Iran has a tendency to blame Riyadh and other adversaries for its problems, this charge is credible. Indeed, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has threatened in the past to take the Saudi fight against Tehran to Iranian territory. Riyadh’s investments in development projects in Gwadar, Pakistan, near Iran’s eastern border, can also be seen as an attempt to increase its presence closer to Iran.
Iran, therefore, is overstretched and facing threats from all directions. There are signs, however, that other major players in the war in Yemen may be gearing up for a cease-fire or, at least, a de-escalation in the fighting. The Saudi-led coalition in Yemen is bolstering its offensive against the strategic city of Hodeida. In late October, it sent 10,000 additional troops, including Sudanese forces, to assist in the assault on the city, which began on Nov. 2. The coalition claims that it’s taking territory around Hodeida. Pictures, videos and other information posted on social media appear to corroborate this, showing that coalition forces and their allies are advancing, albeit with resistance, toward the city. Reported casualty figures for Saudi airstrikes are higher than they have been for previous Saudi attacks. On Nov. 4, Yemen’s official Saba news agency also reported the coalition cut off the Houthis’ main supply line to Hodeida, which a Houthi spokesperson denied.
(click to enlarge)
We would expect to see a new offensive launched right before another round of serious negotiations. During such talks, parties often try to improve their bargaining positions by acquiring more territory. And it’s hard to believe that the timing of this offensive – beginning just three days before sanctions on Iran came into effect and around the time that the U.S. called for a cease-fire in Yemen – is a coincidence.
Another sign that more serious talks may be ahead came from Pakistan. Following his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan stated that Pakistan is willing to act as a mediator between Saudi Arabia and Iran, later saying that informal talks have already begun. Iran, for its part, said it would welcome Pakistan as a mediator. These statements, combined with the challenges facing Iran and the intensifying offensive around Hodeida, may indicate that the chances for a settlement are improving.
-
For much of 2018, Yemen's civil war ground on, with the Saudi Arabian-led coalition backing the country's internationally recognized government on one side and rebels from the northern Houthi movement, who have received support and arms from Iran, on the other. The United States, through military support and funding, continues to back the Saudi coalition's efforts to dislodge the Houthis, a traditional Saudi adversary, from Sanaa, the country's ostensible capital. But support for the Saudi war effort in the U.S. Congress has been eroding in the wake of the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, putting pressure on the coalition to cease hostilities.
As the year wraps up, the combatants in Yemen have been engaging in the first meaningful peace talks over the civil war in two years. Whether or not the country can find a political solution to the disputes that spawned the conflict, the pause in hostilities is opening space to address the humanitarian crisis spawned by the fighting. Stratfor's coverage of the Yemen civil war follows the ebbs and flows of the fighting and the political and strategic forces shaping the conflict.
In January, the Southern Transition Council (STC), a group pushing for an independent state in southern Yemen and aligned with the United Arab Emirates, seized the southern city of Aden from the Hadi government. The actions of the STC, a member of the anti-Houthi coalition, demonstrate the chimeric nature of the country's groups and alliances.
The Saudi-led coalition does not need to retake Aden to ensure its military position. The STC has already made clear that it will continue to support the anti-Houthi struggle. Instead, the coalition must mitigate the damage from the clash and negotiate a truce as quickly as possible. In December 2017, the Houthis split with (former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah) Saleh, who was subsequently assassinated. The move divided and weakened the rebel alliance, providing an opening for opposition forces — to change the course of the stalled civil war in the coalition's favor. Emirati tanks and STC fighters led the charge to take the key port of al-Hudaydah on the country's west coast.
Houthi rebels are still recovering strength following Saleh's departure. On Jan. 28, the Houthis held their first parliament session with former Saleh allies in Sanaa, hoping to bury the hatchet. With an accord in place, the Houthis can worry less about guerilla Saleh loyalists attacking them from behind and are better positioned to take advantage of any break in coalition forces. The STC's unexpected bid for control of Aden threatened to interrupt coalition supplies just as the Taiz offensive got underway. The official Yemeni government recognizes the danger. Hadi himself called for a cease-fire in Aden, reminding the STC that the "real and main battle is against the Iranian Houthi militias."
Read the full article: In Yemen, a Coalition Cracks.
This graphic shows how the Southern Transitional Council has interacted with other groups involved in the Yemen Civil War
In March, the Houthis targeted the Saudi capital, Riyadh, with a battery of missiles, resulting in a death. The launch reaffirmed suspicions that Iran was supplying the rebels with weapons.
On the third anniversary of the first Saudi airstrikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen, Saudi Arabia is grappling with continued conflict. Saudi air defense forces claimed that the country's Patriot surface-to-air missile systems intercepted three missiles from Yemen above Riyadh late March 25. Four other missiles, also launched from Yemen, were intercepted earlier that day and were aimed at Najran, Jizan and Khamis Mushait. Eyewitness reports, images and videos from across Riyadh show the missile interception as well as pieces of debris falling in populated areas. Video also showed what appeared to be several failed Patriot missiles, some of which may have caused damage on the ground.
Read more on the Houthi missile strike: Saudi Arabia: Missile Strikes on Riyadh Mark Third Anniversary of War on Houthis.
This map shows where Houthi missile strikes on Saudi Arabia landed
U.N.-sponsored peace talks in September failed before they could get off the ground. The failure was seen as a byproduct of the posturing both sides engaged in as they tried to position themselves as the aggrieved party in the war.
Coalition leaders will have to carefully weigh their military strategy in Yemen against the attitudes of their Western allies, namely the United States. The approach of congressional midterm elections, in particular, could rally lawmakers to move to change the U.S. stance on the Yemeni conflict, an issue that has drawn bipartisan support in Washington. Although the United States will continue to back the Saudi-led coalition mission to restore Hadi's authority, Congress may push the Yemeni government and its foreign allies to compromise with the Houthis to alleviate the humanitarian crisis.
At home, too, Saudi and Emirati leaders may find support for their campaign in Yemen waning. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's military and diplomatic prowess could come into question among the royal family if he fails to bring a decisive end to Yemen's war – and to the kingdom's costly involvement in it.
The Houthis, meanwhile, could imperil the legitimacy they have gained in northern Yemen if supporters perceive that they are responsible for prolonging the conflict. So long as they manage to portray the Saudi-led coalition as the aggressors, they can keep up their recruitment numbers and preserve their standing with the many tribes of north Yemen. But maintaining that buy-in will require the Houthis to deliver results, like food security and an improved economic situation, that may be beyond their reach.
Read the article examining the abortive peace talks and their implications: The Latest Failed Attempt at Peace Talks Means More of the Same in Yemen.
This chart shows the effects that popular disapproval could have on support for arms sales
As the humanitarian costs of the Yemen war have risen, and the murder of dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi turned public sentiment against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, pressure for a nonmilitary solution to the conflict has increased.
Even in the face of growing U.S. and global opposition, however, Riyadh will not easily shift its stance in Yemen. The Saudi involvement there is driven not only by its desire to deny Iran a foothold on the Arabian Peninsula through its Houthi allies, but also by the historical animosity between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis.
The finger-pointing that undermined the last round of peace talks stands a high chance of repeating itself. A previous effort to broker a cease-fire in September failed when representatives for the Houthis never made the trip to Geneva, where talks were to be held. The no-shows were, in part, prompted by Houthi fears that the coalition would prevent the envoys from returning to their Sanaa base.
Read the full article: What's the Future of U.S. Support for the Saudi War in Yemen?
The battlefronts in Yemen have remained relatively static in the latter half of 2018
The pressure on the Saudi coalition opened the way for meaningful peace talks, which unfolded in December in Sweden. A resulting cease-fire in the embattled strategic port city of al-Hudaydah is holding for now, and both sides have agreed to sit down again after the new year.
At long last, there might finally be light at the end of Yemen's dark tunnel. In the final session of weeklong peace talks in Sweden between the country's warring parties, the two sides agreed to a future cease-fire in the critical port city of al-Hudaydah and the establishment of a humanitarian corridor in Taiz. This follows a tentative agreement earlier in the week to exchange prisoners and reopen Sanaa's rebel-controlled airport to flights, so long as the planes are inspected in a coalition-controlled airport first.
In terms of al-Hudaydah, implementation will be the true test of the feuding parties' resolve, but the announcement of the confidence-building measures at the conclusion of the talks underlines just how fruitful the negotiations were. Despite the years of war, both sides displayed a willingness to talk, offering each other warm handshakes and dispensing with shuttle diplomacy in favor of face-to-face negotiations.
The Swedish negotiations have ended for now, but both the Yemeni forces and the Houthis have agreed to a new round of talks next month. And although the military conflict is continuing apace, the opening of humanitarian corridors for the first time in years could actually provide Yemenis with some much-needed relief. If a partial cease-fire actually holds in al-Hudaydah — even temporarily — it would provide a more solid foundation for other tentative agreements, as well as further peace talks in 2019.
Read more about the current peace effort: Yemen: Two Warring Sides Take a Tentative Step Toward Peace.
-
Note date
Nov. 8, 2018
By Xander Snyder
Why Iran Might Cut Its Losses in Yemen
Iran is overstretched, and the war in Yemen may not be worth fighting anymore.
Over the past three years, there have been many attempts to find a resolution to the war in Yemen. None have been successful. In September, for example, U.N.-brokered peace talks collapsed when the Iran-backed Houthi rebels declined to send a representative. But now, it seems conditions in Iran might force that country to cut its losses and limit its involvement there.
Iran is under serious pressure at home right now due to two factors. The first is U.S. oil and gas sanctions, which went into effect Monday. The regime in Tehran has already faced significant opposition resulting from the country’s economic struggles this year, and the sanctions will likely compound the problem. With declining finances, Iran’s funding of operations in Yemen might divert finances from elsewhere and cause further social strain domestically.
It’s unclear how much money Iran is spending on Yemen, but it has supplied its allies there with munitions, surface-to-air missiles and surface-to-surface ballistic missiles. According to reports, Iran spends nearly $15 billion per year on defense, though many believe the real figure is much higher. Annually, it spends an estimated $6 billion-$20 billion in Syria, $1 billion on Hezbollah and $100 million on Hamas. If these figures are accurate, its total defense expenditure would have to be much higher than $15 billion.
Much of the internal opposition in Iran has focused on its involvement in conflicts abroad and the need to invest more at home. There have been numerous signs that Iranians are increasingly frustrated with the economic and political situation in the country. Nationwide protests erupted repeatedly throughout 2018, and the declining value of the currency has made daily necessities increasingly expensive. Some Iranians have even taken to social media to apologize for the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 – a sign that they’re not afraid of regime reprisals.
The second factor is the looming threat of an Israeli war with Hezbollah, a staunch Iranian ally. On Nov. 1, Israel warned Lebanon, through France, that it must take action against Hezbollah’s production of rockets in Lebanese factories, likely an attempt to publicly show that it has made every effort to try to avert war. Hezbollah has received rockets from Iran for years and, more important, has recently boasted about getting precision missiles from Tehran, a far more serious threat to Israel than artillery rockets. Israel knows from past experience that, in the case of war, airstrikes alone wouldn’t be enough to eliminate these weapons. Ground operations, therefore, may be required, and this could substantially compromise Iran’s position in southern Syria. Lebanon and Syria are ultimately more critical to Iranian interests than Yemen is, and if a conflict in Lebanon is really in the offing, Tehran likely won’t want to continue spending its resources in Yemen.
Iran also faces a rising threat from insurgents at home. Attacks by Iranian Kurdish militants in western Iran have increased this year. In October, 29 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps were killed during a parade in Khuzestan, a strategic western province that shares a porous border with Iraq. In the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, Sunni insurgents abducted several IRGC members and are holding them in Pakistan. The Iranians have blamed Saudi Arabia for the attack, and though Iran has a tendency to blame Riyadh and other adversaries for its problems, this charge is credible. Indeed, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has threatened in the past to take the Saudi fight against Tehran to Iranian territory.
Riyadh’s investments in development projects in Gwadar, Pakistan, near Iran’s eastern border, can also be seen as an attempt to increase its presence closer to Iran.
Iran, therefore, is overstretched and facing threats from all directions. There are signs, however, that other major players in the war in Yemen may be gearing up for a cease-fire or, at least, a de-escalation in the fighting. The Saudi-led coalition in Yemen is bolstering its offensive against the strategic city of Hodeida. In late October, it sent 10,000 additional troops, including Sudanese forces, to assist in the assault on the city, which began on Nov. 2. The coalition claims that it’s taking territory around Hodeida. Pictures, videos and other information posted on social media appear to corroborate this, showing that coalition forces and their allies are advancing, albeit with resistance, toward the city. Reported casualty figures for Saudi airstrikes are higher than they have been for previous Saudi attacks. On Nov. 4, Yemen’s official Saba news agency also reported the coalition cut off the Houthis’ main supply line to Hodeida, which a Houthi spokesperson denied.
(click to enlarge)
We would expect to see a new offensive launched right before another round of serious negotiations. During such talks, parties often try to improve their bargaining positions by acquiring more territory. And it’s hard to believe that the timing of this offensive – beginning just three days before sanctions on Iran came into effect and around the time that the U.S. called for a cease-fire in Yemen – is a coincidence.
Another sign that more serious talks may be ahead came from Pakistan. Following his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan stated that Pakistan is willing to act as a mediator between Saudi Arabia and Iran, later saying that informal talks have already begun. Iran, for its part, said it would welcome Pakistan as a mediator. These statements, combined with the challenges facing Iran and the intensifying offensive around Hodeida, may indicate that the chances for a settlement are improving.
-
An agreement in Yemen. Yemen’s internationally recognized government and the secessionist Southern Transitional Council signed a peace agreement in Riyadh. The agreement includes such measures as the unification of the groups’ respective military units, the deposit of all state revenues into the central bank in Aden, and the return of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi's administration to the southern city of Aden. Saudi Arabia has backed the Yemeni government forces, while the United Arab Emirates has backed the Southern Transitional Council, although the Saudis and Emiratis have previously cooperated to combat the Houthi rebels, an Iranian proxy group. The new government will have 24 ministers with equal representation among southerners and northerners. Saudi Arabia will lead a special committee in charge of overseeing enforcement of the agreement. With an agreement in place, the two sides can now jointly focus their attention on dealing with the Houthis.
-
South Korea has sent a warship to the Red Sea "where Yemeni Houthi rebels seized two of its vessels and one from Saudi Arabia, in the latest attacks on sea lines vital to oil shipping," Bloomberg reports this morning. The RoK ships involved a tugboat and a sand dredger, both with a combined six people onboard; the Saudi vessel was also a tugboat, and it included 10 people.
Fortunately, South Korea's Cheonghae counter-piracy unit was already operating around Oman. A bit more about those sailors: "South Korea's 302-personnel Cheonghae unit includes the destroyer Dae Jo-yeong, an anti-submarine helicopter and three speed boats," Bloomberg writes. Cheonghae has been stationed in the Gulf of Aden since 2009.
According to the Houthis, the three vessels were seized "near Uqban island... and taken to the Yemeni port of Salif" because all three ships were "in Yemeni territorial waters without [Houthi] approval," Reuters reports.
Houthi reax: If this tug and dredger are truly South Korea's, then they can go. A senior official told Reuters, "Yemeni coast guards ... are checking to see whether (the vessel) belongs to the countries of aggression or to South Korea, in which case it will be released after completing legal procedures."
.
-
Peace Progress in Yemen
A settlement could undermine Iran’s regional designs.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 3, 2020 7:11 pm ET
With few parts of the world trending toward greater peace and order, it’s worth highlighting some good recent news in Yemen, of all places. The state on the southwestern Arabian peninsula has been the site of a catastrophic civil war for more than five years since the Iran-backed Houthi movement seized control of the capital city of Sana’a. The opposition forces have been fractured but last week reached an agreement to put aside their differences and focus on the Houthi threat. This could be the first step toward a larger settlement that alleviates suffering in the country and rolls back Iranian imperialism.
Until 1990 Yemen was composed of two countries, North Yemen and South Yemen. The fight against the Houthis has been undermined as the internationally recognized Hadi government, backed by Saudi Arabia, also battles separatists backed by the United Arab Emirates who want self-rule in Yemen’s south. Last week the separatists agreed to end their claims to independence and join a power-sharing deal with the Hadi government.
This matters because it puts the U.S. and its Gulf allies in a better position to handle the Houthis. The Iran-backed group rules over most of Yemen’s population in the country’s northwest, including dozens of miles of strategically important coastline along the Red Sea. The Saudi-backed war with the Houthis has also roiled American domestic politics, with Democrats and some isolationist Republicans denouncing the Trump Administration’s arms sales and support for Riyadh.
Yet if the U.S. had abandoned Saudi Arabia to let Iran dominate Yemen, the humanitarian situation there might be worse. Shiite Iran’s interest is more mayhem to destabilize the Sunni Arab Gulf states.
The Trump Administration’s maximum-pressure campaign—including sanctions and arms interdictions at sea—has made it more expensive for Tehran to support its Houthi clients. One goal of any final peace settlement will be prying at least some of the Houthis away from Iran, as Saudi Arabia won’t accept a revolutionary Iranian beachhead on its doorstep.
Democrats have opposed the Trump Administration’s strategy of resisting Iran’s regional designs. Yet the agreement among Yemeni factions, if it holds, puts the U.S. in a better position to roll back Iranian influence in a strategic region. A Biden Administration could do great damage, in Yemen and beyond, by accommodating Iran and destabilizing America’s Middle East alliances.
-
The State Department told Congress Friday that it will reverse the Trump Administration’s designation of Yemen’s Houthi rebels as a foreign terrorist organization. By Sunday Foggy Bottom was asking the group to stop behaving like a terrorist organization.
“As the President is taking steps to end the war in Yemen and Saudi Arabia has endorsed a negotiated settlement, the United States is deeply troubled by continued Houthi attacks,” a State Department spokesman said Sunday. “We call on the Houthis to immediately cease attacks impacting civilian areas inside Saudi Arabia and to halt any new military offensives.”
Yemen’s civil war has been a humanitarian disaster since the Iran-backed Houthis seized the capital city of Sana’a more than six years ago. Saudi Arabia, with U.S. assistance, has led a coalition to support the country’s internationally recognized government. Democrats and some isolationist Republicans, critical of Saudi conduct, tried and failed to force the Trump Administration to end its involvement.
Last week President Biden announced the U.S. would pull its assistance for “offensive operations” and cancel “relevant arms sales.” Mr. Biden paradoxically promised the U.S. still would help Saudi Arabia defend itself from Houthi attacks.
NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.
PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBED
The State Department also appointed an envoy to begin a fresh push to end the conflict. Seeking a negotiated peace for a war that has killed nearly a quarter-million people is important. But in the Middle East, adversaries read unilateral concessions as weakness unless they are made from a dominant position.
These early moves will have ramifications beyond Yemen. In an interview recorded Friday, Mr. Biden said the U.S. won’t lift sanctions until the Iranian regime ends its violation of the 2015 nuclear deal. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded that Iran won’t comply with the accord until sanctions are lifted. The Iranians believe Mr. Biden will blink first.
Backed by an Iran that expects to be courted by the U.S., the Houthis think they’re winning and will try to gain ground as America retreats. Undermining friends and emboldening adversaries is not a good formula for peace.
Copyright ©2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the February 9, 2021, print edition.
-
February 9, 2021
View On Website
Open as PDF
Biden's First Middle East Moves
By: George Friedman
Last week, U.S. President Joe Biden took two steps in the Middle East. The first was that he notified Congress of his intention to remove the Houthis fighting in Yemen from the government’s list of foreign terrorist organizations. The second was that he said the U.S. would end its support for the Saudi-led campaign in Yemen and would review its relationship with Saudi Arabia over concerns about that country’s human rights record. In and of themselves, these two actions have little meaning. Viewed together, they may represent a radical shift in U.S. Middle East policy. The question, of course, is how and even whether this shift will affect the reality of the region. As I have so often written, policy is the list of things we wish for. Geopolitical reality is what we get.
The Houthis are a major faction in what seems the eternal Yemeni civil war. They are aligned with Iran, facing off against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. The war in Yemen has to a great extent morphed from a civil war into a war between other countries’ proxies. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been carrying out airstrikes and providing some support on the ground in the fight against the Houthis. Iran, on the other hand, has been providing missiles to the Houthis (or Houthi-appearing Iranian forces), which have been fired into Saudi Arabia.
Yemen's Strategic Location
(click to enlarge)
Yemen is a strategic country. It can project force into Saudi Arabia and Oman, or allow more powerful allies to do so. More important, from Yemen’s location a hypothetical, stronger power could close the Bab el Mandeb strait, and in doing so close the Red Sea. Access to the Red Sea is vital: In 1967, Egypt closed the Tiran Straits, blocking Israel from the Red Sea and triggering the Six-Day War.
Yemen is in no position to block the straits itself, but an outside party seeking to sow regional chaos might be. And if it did, it could draw Egypt, Israel and Ethiopia into a conflict they don’t want, and threaten Saudi Arabia and Oman, thereby weakening the Arab position in the Persian Gulf.
Iran is not in Yemen for its health. In the short term (which is maybe the only term there will be), Yemen is a base from which Iran can put pressure on Saudi Arabia, which it sees as its major rival, and also on the UAE, the major native Persian Gulf model, to expend resources on an operation that is not in its immediate national security interest but which it can’t avoid. In the long run, were the Houthis to win the civil war under Iranian patronage, it could both destabilize the region and persuade some Sunni Arab powers to align with Iran, changing the balance of power in the region at the very least.
The agreement between Israel and the UAE, which is rapidly expanding to other powers – including the Saudis, who are full members without signing the accords for domestic reasons – is an anti-Iran coalition. The Sunni Arab states view Iran as their mortal threat, and they see Yemen not only as a test battlefield with Iran but also as a direct assault on core interests, ranging from Syria to Iraq to Yemen itself. The Sunni Arab countries’ fear of Iran is not primarily about nuclear weapons. They see that as one threat among many – as something that Iran doesn’t have and that, if that changes, will be dealt with by Israel. What they fear is Iran’s intrusion in places like Syria and Yemen and the possibility that, in the event of success, these and other countries would turn into Iranian satellites, giving Iran what it really wants, which is the dominant position in the Middle East.
The Trump administration’s position was to treat nuclear weapons in Iran as simply part of a broader threat. In other words, with or without nuclear weapons, Iranian covert operations and subversion could give it a dominant position in the area. Sanctions were designed to cripple Iran internally, while the Abraham Accords were an attempt to create a powerful coalition, not dependent on U.S. direct intervention, to block Iranian adventures.
The decisions to remove the Houthis from the terrorist list and to review the Saudis’ human rights record are not in themselves significant. But the Biden administration appears to be either gesturing toward a new policy or planning one. It has promised to revive the nuclear treaty with Iran. But that was signed in a different Middle East. In today’s Middle East, the solution to the Iranian problem has become indigenous: a massive alliance from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, including a significant nuclear power, Israel, and other powers prepared to challenge Iran, nuclear or not.
The administration is signaling a move toward a hostile relationship with the Saudis over Yemen and human rights. If it follows through on the former, it will also be moving against the UAE, where the U.S. has bases. And it will be moving against Israel, which sees the Saudis as a critical foundation of the alliance. Saudi Arabia is less stable than it once was, and the ability of the regime to live up to the new administration’s conception of human rights is limited. The threat of an Iran-dominated Yemen is real.
It is difficult to imagine that the Biden administration wants to be forced to deal with an Iran-dominated Yemen or an unstable Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine that the two recent gestures by the administration are more than just gestures. There is, of course, another possibility, which is that Biden somehow believes he can coax Iran into some benign relationship with the Sunni Arabs. Doing that by returning to the nuclear treaty as it was originally written might open the door to Iranian interest, but it would panic the rest of the region. This is a region where memories go back centuries, and where alliances, like the current anti-Iran one, are based not on affection but on cold calculation.
Iran is in a box, the rest of the region is in an unprecedented alignment, and as many in the administration learned in Libya, things can get much worse. From where I sit, the most important thing the U.S. learned is to avoid large-scale military involvement in the Middle East. Let Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the rest handle it, because they have no choice. It is their imperative and constraint. The key is to not rock the boat. The danger is that all new administrations want to make their mark. The good thing about this administration is that it remembers Libya, and its commitment to human rights there. The policy might seem virtuous, but the outcome may be far from the intention.
These two gestures are not actions, and it is hard to see where they can lead.
-
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17165/yemen-houthi-rebels-terrorists
-
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17195/iran-houthis-celebrate-biden
-
In Yemen, Foreign Intervention Is Futile
Foreign meddling is nothing new for the war-torn country.
By: Hilal Khashan
Yemen has been subjected to foreign meddling for centuries. The British occupied Aden in 1839 and didn’t leave until over a century later. The Ottomans launched two campaigns in Yemen in the 16th and 17th centuries, both of which failed. The Egyptians fought a bloody war there between 1962 and 1967 before pulling out of the country. And in 2015, the Saudis launched Operation Firmness Storm to try to wrestle the country away from the Houthi rebels. But what all these external players have come to realize is that foreign military intervention in Yemen is futile. Its mountains are impregnable and its people are battle-tested. Still, that hasn’t stopped many from trying.
Saudi Incursions
Of all the foreign actors that have injected themselves in Yemen’s internal affairs, perhaps none has been more influential than Saudi Arabia. During Ibn Saud’s establishment of the Saudi kingdom in the early 20th century, he realized that, to secure the new country, he needed to secure its border with Yemen. This was particularly so after the Saudis seized Jizan and Najran with the signing of the Treaty of Taif, which ended the 1934 Saudi-Yemeni war.
After Yemen’s republican coup in 1962, which began the North Yemen Civil War, Saudi attention focused on containing the communist south and controlling the north. The government’s tight grip kept the Saudis out of the south, but thanks to generous financial support, they won the backing of northern tribes, keeping the central government in Sanaa politically weak. The Saudis failed to prevent a Marxist paramilitary group called the National Liberation Front from seizing power in the south after the British pulled out in 1967, leading to the establishment of the Arab world’s only Marxist country, the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, also known as South Yemen. North Yemen’s president, Ibrahim al-Hamdi, tried to unite the north with the south and to curb Saudi influence but was assassinated in 1977. The circumstances of his death were never investigated and remain a mystery to this day.
(click to enlarge)
Fast-forward four decades and the Saudis are again trying to impose their will on Yemen. They launched Operation Firmness Storm in 2015, aimed at recapturing the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, from the Houthis and reinstating the internationally recognized government of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. Hadi was vice president during the 2011 uprising that led to President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s resignation. Saudi Arabia helped to put down the uprising, thereby blocking a political transition from taking shape. The Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council’s 2011 initiative hijacked the peace process, appointing Hadi, a leading figure in the previous regime, as Saleh’s successor. But the move backfired, as the Houthis seized the capital, Sanaa, in September 2014. They responded to the Saudi-led military campaign by launching ballistic missile and drone attacks into Saudi Arabia – which have only increased in frequency in recent years.
Six years into the conflict, the Houthis are stronger than ever. Countless attempts to end the war have achieved little. Since the beginning of the conflict, the United Nations has sent three envoys to Yemen and engaged rebels in talks in Geneva and Kuwait, but to no avail. It also organized conferences in Stockholm to avert a full-scale offensive on Houthi-held Hodeida in 2018. But the Houthis have chosen to keep fighting, having gained momentum despite the Saudis’ involvement.
The Houthis’ determination isn’t the only thing keeping the war going, however. Iran has interests here too. The Houthis’ desire to control Yemen’s west coast, especially Hodeida port, is driven in part by Iran’s desire to dominate shipping lanes in the Red Sea. Iran, which has supported the Houthis throughout the war, wants access to the Arab region’s southern gate. To this end, Iran is also hoping to help the Houthis recapture the Hanish Islands, which were seized by Saudi-led forces. For Tehran, Yemen is also an ideal bridge to East Africa, a region Iran hopes to penetrate once it’s free of U.S. sanctions.
A Heavy Toll
Yemen’s collapse is a fall from grace for a country that the Greeks and Romans called “Arabia Felix” (loosely meaning “Happy Arabia”) and that was richer than its neighbors before the oil boom. The war has displaced millions and killed more than 330,000. Hundreds of thousands of children under the age of five have been left to starve, creating the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in two decades. (It’s also worth noting that addiction to qat, a plant narcotic used as a stimulant, is another major issue for the country. Some 90 percent of men, 73 percent of women and 20 percent of children under 12 years regularly use the narcotic, whose production consumes 60 percent of Yemen’s agricultural land and 30 percent of its underground water.)
The war destroyed the country’s infrastructure and decimated its military and security apparatuses. Reconstruction will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, money that Yemen doesn’t possess and can’t expect to raise. The country was marred by abject poverty and widespread inequality long before the war began. Its deep-rooted class, tribal, regional and sectarian divisions have been exacerbated by foreign intervention, further complicating its path to peace. The country is a jungle of weapons and unruly militias that have an interest in keeping the conflict going. Its wartime economy is so deep-seated that dismantling it might be even more challenging than reaching a political agreement among the warring factions.
The Yemeni national army is highly politicized, split into several factions that support either the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islah Movement or former President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s General People’s Congress. Meanwhile, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula has lost much of its power thanks to frequent U.S. targeting. The Islamic State never gained much traction in the country, having alienated the tribes with its brutality, and is unlikely to be much of a threat to Yemen in the future.
Inevitable Agreement
The Houthis are desperate to create new realities on the ground ahead of peace talks. Their relentless offensive to seize oil-rich Marib, the last government stronghold in north Yemen, has turned into a quagmire that has had a staggering human toll on both sides. (The Houthis are looking to capture Marib’s Safer oil production facilities to help finance their war effort.) The stalemate will pave the way to lengthy talks, likely leading to a shaky peace deal and loose state arrangement similar to several other Arab countries. The warring factions’ ties to regional powers prevent a more concrete resolution from taking hold.
The Houthis have committed more fighters to the battle for Marib than any other engagement in the six-year war. They have promoted it among supporters as a battle against hypocrites, apostates and Saudi occupiers. To Arab critics of political Islam, the Houthis describe the battle as a fight against the Muslim Brotherhood and its Yemeni chapter, Islah, which controls Marib. To the international community, they paint it as a fight against al-Qaida and the Islamic State, even though these groups operate in Yemen’s deep south, far from the areas the Houthis are fighting over now. The high death toll from the battle has alienated their primary base of military recruitment in Dhamar governorate. Their failure to seize Marib would undermine their plans to control the west coast and the Bab el-Mandeb strait. The outcome of this battle, inconclusive as it may be, could determine the future course of the war itself as well as Iran’s influence in the country.
Territorial Control in Yemen
(click to enlarge)
The Peace and National Partnership Agreement that emerged from the 2014 National Dialogue Conference failed to bring the country any closer to peace. The Houthis have scrapped plans for a new power-sharing constitution, determined to become Yemen’s dominant political broker. In southeast Yemen, the Southern National Salvation Council, which emerged in 2019, opposes the separatist Southern Transitional Council (STC). It seeks to work with other Yemeni groups to launch a new, decentralized political system that recognizes pluralism. A north-based National Salvation Front is also in the works and will include the Southern Movement, which is currently at odds with the STC, Islah and the General People’s Congress.
The Saudi-led coalition is now led by Tareq Abdullah Saleh, who defected from the Houthi camp after they killed his uncle, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. He dislodged the secessionist, UAE-backed Salafist Giants brigade. His forces will most likely join the post-conflict Yemeni army as new political formations take shape in preparation for more peace talks.
Still, the factions are entrenched in their positions. The Houthis have control over most of the north. The STC faces stiff opposition in the south. Islah has created its own independent government, separate from Hadi’s. The Southern Transitional Council set up an autonomous administration in Aden and the surrounding areas. Meanwhile, these groups’ foreign patrons have their own desired outcomes. The United Arab Emirates wants to partition Yemen. In Mahra governorate, Oman and Saudi Arabia are competing for influence among the local population. And Iran is using the Houthis as a bargaining chip in its nuclear talks with the U.S.
These foreign players are unlikely to stop meddling in Yemen’s affairs anytime soon. The problem for Yemen is that its social structure and constant need for foreign aid make it relatively easy for its neighbors to attract groups desperate for assistance.
-
It's not incompetence; it's negligence, and it's costing lives everywhere we turn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2021/11/11/group-biden-removed-from-terror-list-storms-u-s-embassy-in-yemen-takes-hostages-n1531964
Group Biden Removed From Terror List Storms U.S. Embassy in Yemen, Takes Hostages
https://www.memri.org/jttm/iran-backed-houthis-reportedly-raid-us-embassy-sanaa-yemen-following-series-kidnappings-embassy
-
January 27, 2022
View On Website
Open as PDF
In Yemen, the UAE Unseats the Saudis as a Regional Power
Abu Dhabi’s rise in the Middle East is most evident in the war-torn country.
By: Hilal Khashan
It’s evident now more than ever that the United Arab Emirates is surpassing Saudi Arabia as the preeminent Arab power in the Middle East. Since the beginning of the Arab uprisings more than a decade ago, the UAE has worked to weather the storm, suppressing the region’s turmoil by any means necessary, transforming itself into a credible Middle Eastern power and fostering economic cooperation with countries abroad. In contrast, Saudi Arabia has pursued a hesitant, sometimes erratic foreign policy while being preoccupied with internal issues like royal succession and regime stability. Nowhere is the Saudis’ failure and the UAE’s rise more evident than in Yemen.
Yemen’s Outsize Role
For a relatively minor country in the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen plays an outsize role in determining Middle Eastern power dynamics. In part, that’s because the country is a key element in Iran’s plans for regional expansion. Iran is preparing the Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen to become the breeding ground for its subversive activities throughout the Middle East. The outcome of the war there will determine the extent to which Iran can achieve its regional objectives. Missiles and drones launched from Yemen can reach any point on the Persian Gulf as well as Eilat, Israel’s port on the Gulf of Aqaba. The difficulty of using Iran’s proxies in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq to attack Israel also makes Yemen a valuable asset.
Iran's Sphere of Influence in the Middle East
(click to enlarge)
In 2019, the UAE decided to withdraw its forces in Yemen after the Houthis launched missile and drone attacks targeting Abu Dhabi’s al-Barakah nuclear power plant in 2017 and its airport in 2018. The UAE had already established control of south Yemen and the maritime route from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea. The Houthis and Abu Dhabi reached a tacit understanding that the UAE could dominate the south but would stay away from the north. The deal worked until recently, when Abu Dhabi decided to join Saudi efforts to hold back a Houthi advance in north-central Yemen, where the rebel group, backed militarily and financially by Iran, had made significant territorial gains over the past decade.
The Saudis didn’t want to see the oil-rich regions of Shabwa and Marib fall into the Houthis’ hands. But they, along with Yemeni President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi's forces and the Brotherhood-affiliated al-Islah Party’s forces, failed to stop the Houthis’ advance toward Marib, the only remaining government stronghold. Riyadh appealed to Abu Dhabi to participate in the decisive battle, for whoever controls Marib will have the upper hand in the north. The UAE pledged to commit the elite southern Yemeni Giants Brigades, which it controls, only if Yemen's president agreed to dismiss the pro-Muslim Brotherhood governor of Marib. When he did, the Saudi-led coalition launched a successful offensive to drive the Houthis out of the region and put Yemen on the road to recovery.
The Houthis’ defeat was a turning point in the war and in the south’s rise as the dominant force in deciding the country’s future. Stunned by the offensive spearheaded by UAE-trained Yemeni forces, the Houthis responded by launching Operation Yemen Hurricane, which directly targeted vital economic sites in Abu Dhabi, including its airport and facilities owned by the Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. (ADNOC). A few days later, they launched a new wave of drone and ballistic missile attacks on the Al-Dhafra Air Base, which houses U.S., French and UAE military assets. Before the operation began, the Houthis also hijacked an Emirati ship loaded with military hardware destined for an unknown location and forced it to dock at Hodeida port. The message was clear: The Houthis have the capability to inflict damage on the UAE in a number of ways.
The Houthis’ unprecedented attacks triggered a series of retaliatory Saudi-led coalition airstrikes, which inflicted heavy civilian casualties. The problem for the coalition is that after seven years of bombardment, there are no Houthi targets left to destroy and Yemen’s rugged mountains make it impossible to flush out Houthi fighters from their hideouts.
Although the UAE intervention helped determine who controls what territory in central Yemen, it is not Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Zayed’s objective to take the battle to the north, where the Houthis still dominate. His intervention was aimed at maintaining a precarious balance of power between the Houthis and the embattled Mansour government – one that would ensure the UAE-dominated south remained the decisive military force in the country. It was critically important for the UAE to expel the Houthis from the oil-rich regions of Marib and Shabwa. If the Houthis occupied these areas, their forces could easily wrest control of Aden and the Socotra archipelago, jeopardizing the Emirates’ access to the Red Sea. The extent of their defeat there explains why they launched such significant attacks on Abu Dhabi.
Over the past seven years, Abu Dhabi has invested in local military forces in south Yemen, including the Giants Brigades, the Southern Transitional Council forces and the Shabwani elite forces. It had a strong Yemeni force under its command capable of tipping the military balance in any confrontation with the Houthis in its favor. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, was not able to pull off this victory on its own. It could have stabilized Yemen in 2014 after the Houthis seized Sanaa, but it was too busy with domestic issues, especially after the death of King Abdullah. Several royal officials and the intelligence apparatus took charge of the Yemeni dossier but failed to establish a coherent policy. Their primary concern focused on defeating the al-Islah Party, even if it meant allowing the Houthis to take over most of Yemen. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman launched Operation Decisive Storm in March 2015, assuming he would score a quick victory. Six weeks into the campaign, he realized conquering the Houthis would be a daunting endeavor and renamed the incursion Operation Renewal of Hope.
Emerging Power Structure
The general perception among U.S. allies in the Middle East is that the region is at the bottom of Washington’s list of priorities. Abu Dhabi has managed to adapt, however. It sees beyond the conflict in Yemen and aspires to achieve broad regional economic cooperation. For example, it followed its efforts to thaw tensions with Turkey by opening up to Iran. It proposed a land cargo transportation agreement with Turkey to replace the long sea lane serving the two countries. The land route, welcomed by Ankara, begins in the UAE’s Sharjah container port and crosses through Iran’s Bandar Abbas port.
Unlike the UAE, Saudi Arabia lacks the resolve to open to the outside world, politically and economically. Even though it tacitly deals with Israel, it lacks the courage to make it public. Iran had no real influence on the Houthis until the Saudis joined the war in 2015, driven by their paranoia about Iranian expansion in the region. They opened Yemen to Iranian penetration, just as they contributed to Iran’s takeover of Iraq since 2003.
A referral is the best compliment.
Feel free to forward this email to friends and colleagues.
-
Navy plans new Red Sea task force as Houthi attacks increase
Waterway vital to shipping cargo, energy supplies
BY JON GAMBRELL ASSOCIATED PRESS DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
| The U.S. Navy said Wednesday it will assemble a new task force with allied countries to patrol the Red Sea after a series of attacks attributed to Yemen’s Houthi rebels in a waterway that’s essential to global trade.
Vice Adm. Brad Cooper, who oversees the Navy’s Mideastbased 5th Fleet, declined four times to directly name the Iranbacked Houthis in his remarks to journalists announcing the task force. However, the Houthis have launched explosive-laden drone boats and mines into the waters of the Red Sea, which runs from Egypt’s Suez Canal in the north, down through the narrow Bab el-Mandeb Strait in the south that separates Africa from the Arabian Peninsula.
“In a macro sense, this region literally and figuratively fuels the world,” Adm. Cooper said. “The area is so vast that we just can’t do it alone, so we’re going to be at our best when we partner.”
The Combined Maritime Forces command, a 34-nation organization which Adm. Cooper oversees from a base in Bahrain, already has three task forces that handle piracy and security issues both inside and outside of the Persian Gulf. The new task force will be commissioned Sunday and will include the USS Mount Whitney, a Blue Ridge-class amphibious command ship previously part of the Navy’s African and European 6th Fleet.
Adm. Cooper said he hoped the task force of two to eight ships at a time would target those smuggling coal, drugs, weapons and people in the waterway. Coal smuggling has been used by Somalia’s al Qaeda-linked al-Shabab terror group to fund their attacks. Weapons linked by the Navy and analysts to Iran have been intercepted in the region as well, likely on their way to the Houthis. Yemen also sees migrants from Africa try to cross its war-torn nation to reach jobs in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
The Houthis, with a base in northern Yemen, seized the capital, Sanaa, in September 2014. A Saudi-led coalition entered the war on the side of Yemen’s exiled government in March 2015. Years of inconclusive fighting has pushed the Arab world’s poorest nation to the brink of famine. A truce around the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan appears for now to be still be holding.
The Red Sea is a vital shipping lane for both cargo and the global energy supplies, making any mining of the area a danger not only to Saudi Arabia but to the rest of the world. Mines can enter the water and then be carried away by the currents, which change by the season in the Red Sea.
The Red Sea has been mined previously. In 1984, some 19 ships reported striking mines there, with only one ever being recovered and disarmed, a U.N. panel said.
In Yemen’s current war, Houthi missile fire in the Red Sea has come near an American warship in the past. In October 2016, the U.S. Navy said the USS Mason came under fire from two missiles launched out of Yemen. Neither reached the warship, though the U.S. retaliated with Tomahawk cruise missile strikes on three coastal radar sites in Houthi-controlled territory.
The week before, the Emirati vessel SWIFT-1 came under Houthi missile attack. The Emirati government asserted the SWIFT-1 at the time carried humanitarian aid; U.N. experts later said of the claim that they were “unconvinced of its veracity.” The vessel had been sailing back and forth in the Red Sea between an Emirati troop base in Eritrea and Yemen.
In April 2021, an Iranian cargo ship that is said to serve as a floating base for Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard forces came under attack in the Red Sea — likely part of a wider shadow war between Israel and Iran.
More recently in January, the Houthis seized the Emiratifl agged ship Rwabee in the Red Sea off Yemen. The Saudi-led coalition asserted the ship carried medical equipment from a dismantled Saudi field hospital. The Houthis released video showing military-style inflatable rafts, trucks and other vehicles on the vessel, as well as rifles. Another Yemen missile launch into the Red Sea happened in March as well.
For now, Israel hasn’t announced plans to join the Combined Maritime Forces though the U.S. Navy has held drills with it, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in November. Adm. Cooper declined to say whether Israel had expressed interest in joining the joint command.
-
March 23, 2023
View On Website
Open as PDF
Yemen’s Intractable Civil War
Iran will not abandon the Houthis to improve its relationship with Saudi Arabia.
By: Hilal Khashan
The civil war in Yemen began in 2014 with the Houthi rebels taking over the country’s north, including the capital, the international airport and the port of Hodeidah. The conflict escalated a year later to become a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which led an Arab coalition that intervened to support the internationally recognized government and retake territory seized by the Iran-backed Houthis. In 2020, the separatist Southern Transitional Council, an umbrella group of militants backed by the UAE, declared control over the southern city of Aden. It became increasingly clear to the Saudis that they were unable to change the course of the war, which has had a massive impact on the local population. Since 2015, more than 400,000 Yemenis have lost their lives due to violence, hunger and disease. The World Health Organization reports that about half of Yemeni children suffer from stunting due to starvation and malnutrition, threatening their mental and physical development.
Some observers believed that a deal signed by Saudi Arabia and Iran in Beijing earlier this month to restore diplomatic relations would help end the crisis in Yemen. But the reality on the ground suggests otherwise. The main weakness of the Saudi-Iran rapprochement is that it’s an agreement of necessity, not conviction, driven by domestic issues and the international community’s preoccupation with the war in Ukraine. Neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia can afford to lose the war because whoever controls Yemen can secure the entire Arabian Peninsula.
Saudi Focus
Saudi Arabia has always viewed Yemen as a threat to its territorial integrity and has tried to derail Yemen’s development. The Saudis won a war against Yemen in 1934 and annexed Jizan and Najran. In 1948, Riyadh backed Imam Yahya against a constitutional revolution, and in 1962, it helped Imam Muhammad al-Badr attempt to reclaim his rule after a coup overthrew the monarchy. The Saudis intervened in local Yemeni affairs and bribed its tribes to prevent the country from uniting. They also supported the southern separatists in the 1994 civil war and intervened to stop the 2011 uprising, turning it into a political crisis that ultimately led Yemen to what it is today.
Yemen differs from other countries on the Arabian Peninsula in at least two respects. First, it’s a republic, while the other countries in the region are kingdoms or emirates. Second, it enjoys relatively democratic attributes compared to its neighbors. For Saudi Arabia, this makes Yemen a threat. It’s no coincidence that Yemen isn’t a member of the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council, which includes other countries in the peninsula.
When the United Nations brokered a general cease-fire last April, Yemeni President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi announced, under Saudi pressure, that he was resigning and delegating his powers to the Presidential Leadership Council – the executive body of the internationally recognized government – which was then authorized to reach a comprehensive political solution. Even with the recent agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the council faces serious challenges, such as bridging the divide between the warring factions and remaining united amid the ongoing crises facing the country. Unsurprisingly, it’s made little progress toward a settlement and improving the quality of services for the Yemeni people.
For most Yemenis, the unconstitutional practices of the parties that make up the council are a cause for concern. When Hadi was appointed president in 2012, the parties didn’t question him about the country’s rampant corruption, on the pretext that they could resolve problems after the resignation of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. They still lack transparency today. Seven of the eight council members reside abroad, citing security concerns. The members have been busy splitting the spoils of war among themselves and making patronage appointments but have contributed little to putting Yemen on the track to resolving the conflict that devastated its economy. The Yemeni people have become increasingly frustrated with the council’s performance, and more broadly, the country’s ruling political elite has no base of national support. It’s bereft of the expertise needed to manage domestic affairs and international relations. It also lacks a sense of patriotism, evidenced by the fact that it did not object to regional countries meddling in Yemen’s affairs.
Houthi Victory
By 2022, the Houthis had taken control of northern Yemen, except for the oil-rich Marib governorate. They exploited anti-Saudi sentiments within Yemeni society, focusing on how the kingdom’s security measures have harmed the Yemeni people, especially those living in the border areas, and Riyadh’s expulsion of thousands of Yemeni workers from Saudi Arabia. The Houthis also invoked the injustices suffered by Yemenis due to King ibn Saud’s occupation of large chunks of territory that were historically part of Yemen.
Territorial Control in Yemen
(click to enlarge)
In early 2022, government forces, backed by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, launched massive ground operations in Marib and Shabwa. The Houthis answered the offensive with unprecedented drone and missile attacks, launching Operation Yemen Hurricane III against the UAE and Operation Break Siege II against Saudi Arabia. Both countries were shocked by the response from the Houthis, who offered to open peace talks at the end of March. Saudi Arabia responded by announcing the cessation of its military operations two days before the United Nations representative to Yemen announced a cease-fire on April 2.
But Saudi Arabia continued to stall peace talks for several months after the truce went into effect. The situation remained stagnant. It appeared that Riyadh preferred to freeze the conflict, as the world’s major powers became preoccupied with Russia’s war on Ukraine, in the hope that it could reactivate the war under better international conditions. However, the Saudis eventually realized that the Houthis’ military capabilities had developed and that, without U.S. support, Saudi infrastructure, particularly its oil facilities, was in grave danger. Indeed, Saudi Arabia’s actions in the war, including blocking the flow of food and medical supplies, weakened the resolve of Western countries – specifically the United States, which, under congressional pressure, decided to reconsider its security relations with Riyadh.
Meanwhile, the Houthis have been busy imposing social changes in the areas of Yemen they control. They are radically revising the school curriculum, especially regarding religious and social subjects and history. They emphasize the role of summer camps involved in ideological indoctrination, aiming to re-socialize society, especially the youth, using tactics similar to those employed by the Soviet Union and China in the past and North Korea today.
It’s a mistake to believe that Iran will abandon the Houthis or its other regional allies to improve its relationship with Saudi Arabia. For Tehran, this would undermine a key tenet of the Iranian revolution – i.e., exporting its principles throughout the region – and the Islamic Republic itself. Iran will not give the Saudis what it refused to give the U.S. in the stalled Vienna talks.
Limits of the Saudi-Iran Deal
Saudi Arabia has yet to take a clear stance on the future of the conflict, unconvinced by the proposals put forward by Omani meditators in its negotiations with the Houthis. The Omanis urged Saudi officials to build confidence by addressing humanitarian matters, such as the food blockade, and exchanging prisoners. Saudi Arabia has decided to withdraw militarily from the war, consolidate its military relations with its local allies in Marib and Shabwa, and intensify its efforts to separate southern Saudi Arabia from the Saada mountains, the Houthis’ formidable bastion.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE want to break up Yemen and divide it into cantons. In 2017, UAE allies established the Southern Transitional Council from the governorates that constituted the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (1967-1990) to create a political entity equal to the north. But competition over the country’s hydrocarbon riches has been a significant obstacle to realizing this project. The deal with Iran – which the Saudis claim has secret articles, including a commitment by Tehran to suspend weapons shipments to the Houthis – could encourage both countries to accept an agreement to end the war. (Tehran hasn’t admitted that it sends weapons to the Houthis, so it can’t commit to stopping.)
Each party to the normalization deal entered talks with its own interests in mind. China, which helped broker the agreement, wants to cement its relationship with two major oil suppliers and stabilize relations between the two countries, both of which are facing significant challenges at home. Iran is still grappling with the effects of severe Western sanctions and years of international and regional isolation. It needs friendly relations with Saudi Arabia, given that its access to the Arab world goes through Riyadh. Similarly, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman wants to see his country transition from oil dependence into a modern economy, which requires a vision and a conflict-free environment to attract foreign investment.
But the Saudi-Iran deal won’t end the fighting in Yemen. It’s also unlikely to last, and its eventual failure could drag the two countries into conflict again.
-
Iranian Spy Ship Helps Houthis Direct Attacks on Red Sea Vessels
Assistance raises pressure on Israel and the U.S. to take action against the Yemen-based rebels
By Benoit Faucon and Dov Lieber
Dec. 22, 2023 9:41 am ET
WSJ
Iran’s paramilitary forces are providing real-time intelligence to Yemen’s Houthis that the rebels are using to direct drones and missiles to target ships passing through the Red Sea, Western and regional security officials said.
Tracking information gathered by a surveillance vessel controlled by Iran’s paramilitary forces in the Red Sea is passed to the Houthis, who have used it to attack commercial vessels passing through the Bab el-Mandeb strait in recent days, according to the officials.
Earlier this week, the Pentagon unveiled plans for a multinational naval force to protect merchant vessels in the Red Sea. Meanwhile, many of the world’s biggest shipping lines, oil producers and other cargo owners have started diverting vessels from the region, prompting a rise in oil prices and insurance rates.
Many vessels sailing in the strait have been switching off their radios to avoid being tracked online, but an Iranian vessel stationed in the Red Sea is enabling the Houthi drones and missiles to accurately target the ships, the officials said.
The Iranian mission to the United Nations didn’t respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for the Houthis said the group didn’t need to rely on Iran to help in its attacks. “It’s strange to attribute everything to Iran as if it were the world’s strongest power,” the spokesperson said. “We have intelligence facilities that have proven themselves over the years of aggression against us.”
The direct involvement by Iranian actors in the attacks raises the stakes for Israel and the U.S., which are eager to contain Tehran’s role in the region, and risks creating a new front in the conflict between Israel and its foes in the region, just as the U.S. is trying to stop it from escalating.
“The Houthis don’t have the radar technology to target the ships,” said a Western security official. “They need Iranian assistance. Without it, the missiles would just drop in the water.”
The White House National Security Council didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Last week, the Houthis hit a Norwegian cargo vessel with an antiship cruise missile. The ship caught fire and was forced to sail to port after being damaged. None of the crew was injured.
The U.S. has previously said Iran was enabling the Houthi attacks on ships but didn’t say how. Iran for years has supplied weapons to the rebels in their battle against Saudi-backed foes in Yemen.
While the Houthis have said the attacks are in retaliation for Israel’s war in Gaza, the ships they have attacked have little or in some cases no links to Israel.
Washington has told Israel to let the U.S. military respond to the Houthis instead of taking action that could expand its conflict with Hamas and the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia, U.S. and other government officials said.
But a senior Israeli official said the Iranian ship’s intelligence support for the Houthis shows that the West needs to pressure Tehran to halt its assistance, which is disrupting the global shipping trade. “Iran is giving them weapons, and Iran could stop it,” the Israeli official said. “We need to work to put pressure on Iran, so they will stop.”
In 2021, Israeli mines damaged an Iranian spy ship that had also been stationed in the Red Sea, and it was replaced by the vessel currently helping the Houthis, Western officials said.
Israel has also been angered by Houthi missile attacks targeting the southern port of Eilat, though they were intercepted by U.S. defenses.
On Friday, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant warned his country could retaliate against the threats coming out of Yemen. “If they continue to provoke us, try to attack Eilat with missiles or by other means, we will know what to do,” he said, speaking onboard a warship sailing near the Israeli port. “We are preparing. The troops here are ready for any mission and any command.”
Western security officials have previously said Iranian assistance to the Houthis is overseen by the Quds Force, a branch of Iran’s paramilitary Islamic Republic Guard Corps that operates autonomously from the civilian cabinet in Tehran. The U.S. has placed a $15 million bounty on the Quds Force commander in Yemen, Abdolreza Shahlaei, for his role in supplying weapons and explosives to Iraqi Shia groups and planning a 2007 attack in Iraq that killed five American soldiers and wounded three others.
In messages passed to the U.S. through Switzerland and in public, Iran has said it had no control over the actions of the Houthi and other forces in the Middle East that have attacked U.S. and Israeli targets in response to the war in Gaza.
A spokesman for the Iran mission at the United Nations said last week that Iran opposed a U.N. Security Council resolution that imposes an arms embargo only on the Houthis. He said Tehran has abided by its implementation and that the Yemenis were capable of military self-reliance.
-
US Prestige continues to fall world wide.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/pentagons-operation-prosperity-guardian-falls-apart-spain-italy-france-reject-request (https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/pentagons-operation-prosperity-guardian-falls-apart-spain-italy-france-reject-request)
-
Another article making the same point.
-
Washington Can’t Let the Houthis Take Yemen
Their Red Sea shipping assault shows they pose a threat to U.S. interests. So let’s pose one to theirs.
By Kenneth M. Pollack and Katherine Zimmerman
Jan. 8, 2024 5:45 pm ET
It’s time for the U.S. to stop thinking tactically about the Houthis in Yemen and start thinking strategically. The growing number of attacks on shipping in the Red Sea demonstrate they are now a strategic threat to America, its allies and the global economy. We must address them as such.
For the past two decades, the U.S. has dismissed the Houthis as a nuisance. Washington recoiled when the Saudis and Emiratis intervened in Yemen against them in 2015, and the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations have tried to end the fighting with minimal exertion regardless of the outcome. Americans have tended to see the civil war as a humanitarian catastrophe and a breeding ground for terrorists. Our position therefore has been that all that mattered was peace—not who won or on what terms.
That has proved mistaken. The Houthis have made significant gains in Yemen, allowing them to commit aggression beyond the country’s borders. They are doing so as part of Iran’s axis of resistance—the loose alliance of anti-Israel and anti-U.S. groups in the Mideast—and for their own interests.
Though the Houthis claim their actions are in support of the Palestinians, many of the ships they are trying to hit have no connection to Israel. But these attacks do appear to be closely tied to Iranian interests. Tehran is enabling and possibly guiding these attacks by providing targeting information to the Houthis.
These attacks are really about the Houthis demonstrating their ability to disrupt shipping in the vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait, and through that, to threaten the global economy.
That ability is of enormous value to the Houthis and their Iranian allies. For the Iranians, it allows them to demonstrate the power and reach of their axis of resistance, and to use both to pursue their ultimate goal of regional hegemony and the destruction of Israel. For the Houthis, it displays their power and glory, advances their millenarian ideology, galvanizes domestic support that had been in decline, and will doubtless lead them to believe they can strong-arm concessions from other countries.
These threats notwithstanding, the U.S. has continued to act as if the Houthi attacks are little more than an unfortunate byproduct of the wars in Gaza and Yemen. Washington’s response has been purely tactical: Defend shipping in the Red Sea and threaten unspecified consequences for the Houthis. They haven’t stopped, but no consequences have materialized.
Even if the U.S. decides to strike some Houthi asset, such a tactical solution is unlikely to work. Yemen is a desperately poor country; the Houthis are religious zealots; and their military is extremely low-tech. That is why U.S. sanctions have had no effect. It also means they don’t have good targets—such as expensive infrastructure or large warships—that the American military could destroy.
It’s almost impossible to find targets to strike—or even threaten—that would somehow be worth more to the Houthis and Iranians than the enormous benefits they are accruing from the Red Sea attacks. They simply gain too much by assaulting global shipping in a key choke point of world trade.
All this demands that the U.S. take a strategic approach to Yemen and the Houthis—namely, stop them from winning the civil war. It’s clear from the mess in the Red Sea that a Houthi victory would endanger American interests and those of our allies. If they win, the Houthis are likely to become more aggressive and more active helpmates of Iran in its campaign to dominate the Mideast.
Their control and eventual conquest of Yemen is also the one thing the Houthis care about and that Washington could put at risk. It’s proved a strong motivator in the recent past. In 2018, a combined task force of Emirati armor and local Yemeni tribesmen retook most of southern Yemen and then began driving up the Red Sea coast, smashing Houthi defenses and threatening Hudaydah, the last major port in Houthi hands. The Houthis raced to the negotiating table, desperate to cut a deal and stave off a disastrous defeat.
These two factors combine in one clear strategic necessity: The U.S. needs to begin military support to the Yemeni government. That is the only way to ensure the Houthis won’t consolidate their grip on the country and be able to project more power abroad. And it is the only thing that might cause the Houthis and Iranians to rethink their current strategy.
This is a tried and true American approach to troublesome, violent and ideologically difficult states. It was the strategy the Reagan administration ultimately adopted against Libya in the 1980s. To get the Libyans to stop sponsoring terrorist attacks, subverting U.S. allies like Egypt and attacking neighboring states, Washington began providing military support to Libya’s adversaries in Chad. That produced a dramatic Chadian victory—and even threatened a counterinvasion of Libya—which became a key element in eventually forcing dictator Moammar Gadhafi to reverse course.
That successive U.S. administrations largely ignored the Houthis was understandable but unsuccessful. It’s time for Washington to adopt the only promising strategy by threatening the one thing the Houthis hold dear.
Mr. Pollack is a senior fellow and Ms. Zimmerman a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
-
"The growing number of attacks on shipping in the Red Sea demonstrate they are now a strategic threat to America, its allies and the global economy."
---------------------------------
Or as Biden's national security adviser put it, recently, "the Middle East is the quietest it's been in decades".
Or as the new, non-interventionists in the Republican party might put it, 'what will be will be'.
RFK jr says our CIA overthrew foreign governments 80-some times? I think he means acted covertly behind the scenes.
This might be a good opportunity for that.
No, we can't be the world's policeman. We must choose our fights. But when America is weak or absent, the world is a more dangerous place.
-
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/uk-us-expected-to-launch-strikes-against-houthis-times-report/ar-AA1mPnoL
does not sound serious to me.......
-
Excerpt from:
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/us-launches-strikes-on-yemen-and?publication_id=1351274&post_id=140635883&isFreemail=true&r=379fkp
What remains to be commented on:
The US and its tiny isolated rabble of servile ‘allies’ attacked Yemen in an absolutely impotent strike that did nothing and will have no effect whatsoever on Yemen’s continued blockade of the Red Sea.
Russia launched over 7500 missiles at Ukraine—a country that has most of its infrastructure out ‘in the open’, and many people regard Ukraine as hardly having been industrially attrited after 2 years of such continued bombardment. Now imagine what a measly pittance of 70-100 aging Tomahawk missiles is going to do to a country with highly decentralized military structures spread across the deserts.
In short: nothing.
NATO’s 3 month long 24/7 bombardment of Serbia destroyed a whopping dozen tanks and could only degrade the AD by 50%. Without boots on the ground, US’s failed coalition can do nothing to Yemen—and they’re not going boots on the ground so the strikes can only be regarded as a feeble ‘warning’ toward Iran, which will only inspire hearty guffaws in Tehran.
The world can see the US terror regime has no clothes. It looks increasingly weak, particularly given the announcement that Raytheon Lloyd helmed the strikes from—I kid you not—his hospital bed. Yes, he pulled the trigger on a laptop while soiling his bedpan:
https://www.businessinsider.com/defense-secretary-lloyd-austin-ordered-strike-on-houthis-from-hospital-2024-1
A decrepit regime led by a senile president and debilitated secretary of state, launching illegal massacres from their nursing homes and hospital beds against the poorest nation on earth—virtually on the same day as their own bloc ally faced genocide and crimes against humanity charges at The Hague.
You can’t make this up: the optics have never been worse for the Empire of Lies.
That’s not to mention the fact that US apparently took losses and is now trying to cover them up after Ansar Allah forces claimed to have downed a US plane as well as hit a ship:
The “plane” was at least in part corroborated, though it appeared to be a heavy-class drone:
And the problems aren’t going away. Both Tesla and Volvo announced a total cessation of production due to supply disruption problems:
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2p4atitLzM
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/2-us-navy-seals-missing-off-somalias-coast-were-hunting-for-iranian-weapons-official-says-5566682?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2024-01-16-2&src_cmp=breaking-2024-01-16-2&utm_medium=email&est=NinX2ItzGv3XABvHC1zRQvWSiTEPhgzZ55AMUxc2n9jdZmiFmOzDIZ7TktTmogIGL71l
-
Sen Tom Cotton called the American attacks on the Houthis a 'pin prick on a proxy' (of Iran) 'proving their strategy of working through proxies is working'. We are not attacking Iran. We're focusing on the proxy.
In contrast, Trump took out Solemani, the source of the trouble, and actually slowed them for a time.
Obama Biden sends them planeloads of cash - and denies that money finances terror. They're paying for terror like Oct 7 and Houthi strikes on US assets with other money? That makes no sense.
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/were-the-saudis-right-about-the-houthis-after-all/ar-BB1hckPP?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=17bd6d78ab3642b9ac9b2dd1ab9cd99d&ei=16
-
Apparently the Houtis' initial reaction is to flip us the bird.
-
Because of the Red Sea angle I should have suggested this thread to you BBG:
The reason Beijing seems so relaxed about the crisis is obvious: this is a situation in which China wins either way. Either the threat continues but shipping is safer for Chinese vessels than for others, in which case sailing under the protection of the red and gold flag may become a coveted competitive advantage, or Beijing finally tells Iran to knock it off, in which case China becomes the de facto go-to security provider in the Middle East. Both outcomes would be geopolitical coups. No wonder China is willing to accept a little short-term economic pain as the situation plays out.
– Nathan Levine
https://www.samizdata.net/2024/02/samizdata-quote-of-the-day-either-way-china-wins/
-
(6) FATAL ANTI-SHIP MISSILE STRIKE BY HOUTHIS UNDERMINES U.S.: Yemen’s Houthis struck the commercial ship M/V True Confidence with a missile while the ship sailed in international waters in the Gulf of Aden. The strike resulted in three deaths, three critically injured, and an abandoned ship on fire.
Houthi Spokesman Mohamed Abdelsalam said that the Houthis only fire after warning, and the U.S. is responsible for every death.
Why It Matters: First, no Americans were involved in the attack. Second, this was an above-the-waterline strike, so the burning ship is likely to remain a navigational hazard for weeks. Lastly, this happened just after the new permitting system was activated. Shipping and insurance companies are likely to comply with this law and any new ones as other nations decide to extort money at chokepoints. - J.V.