Even amid the Gaza war, Yemen peace talks can be revived if the world were to seize the moment
The Houthi rebel group, which took the capital Sanaa in 2014, continued to hold large swathes of the country even after a seven-year campaign by the internationally recognised government and its regional allies to dislodge them. The government, based in the port city of Aden, was the weaker party, but still standing. But the prolonged stalemate was finally growing tiresome enough that both parties were rumoured to be close to a 'roadmap' to making their ceasefire permanent and ending the war.
The Hamas attack, despite taking place more than 2,000km from Yemeni soil, along with Israel's brutal and ongoing war of revenge in Gaza, changed all of that. The Houthis have dropped peace talks and instead taken to firing at commercial ships in the Red Sea, ostensibly in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. Punitive air strikes on Yemeni cities by Israel, the US and UK have dealt much damage but failed to cripple the Houthis. What hasn't killed them may even have made them stronger. Emboldened by their perception of invincibility, the Houthis continue to rule with extremism and repression.
What hasn't killed the Houthis may even have made them stronger
In the absence of any momentum towards a resolution, the government in Aden risks becoming inert, increasingly paralysed by internal disagreements. Its Presidential Leadership Council – an executive committee comprised of often-competing factions – has been unable to tackle an economic crisis in government-held areas. In May, the prime minister, Ahmed Awad bin Mubarak, resigned after complaining of being blocked by the PLC from carrying out his official duties. Hoping to signal that it takes economic issues seriously, the Council chose the Minister of Finance to replace him. But in the absence of deeper constitutional reform that prevents obstacles of the sort faced by Mr bin Mubarak, it is unlikely to make a difference.
This state of affairs has not merely put the prospect of a Yemeni peace on ice but degraded it. The international community has seemingly become indifferent to that reality. Western powers, in particular, have come to treat Houthi actions as a mere extension of the Gaza conflict, behaving as though the Houthi threat will diminish in the event of a deal between Israel and Hamas.
This approach is both short-sighted and wrong. There is a chance to revive Yemen's peace talks, as the UN's special envoy to Yemen, Hans Grundberg, reminded everyone during a visit to the country this month. The level of fighting within the country has subsided, Mr Grundberg noted, and the calm provides space for confidence-building measures between the two sides, if others can prod them along.
It helps that the Houthis' main backer, Iran, appears to be growing weary of regional conflict, even if the rebels themselves are not. Tehran's security apparatus was badly wounded in its recent war with Israel and has seen its influence both in Syria and Lebanon much diminished. That offers some leverage with which to remind the Houthis that they are not, in fact, invincible, but rather deeply dependent on a network of alliances that is much weaker than it was when they took power.
'The opportunity for peace still exists,' Mr Grundberg told reporters in Aden, 'but it requires courage, compromise and a genuine commitment to the Yemeni people's future.' This may feel like a lot to ask for in a region trying to quell several outbursts of conflict at once, but it is the very least that millions of Yemenis deserve.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Is peace in three years possible in the Middle East?
The northern rim of the Arab world is a mess, any way you look at it. Some US politicians, echoing Israel's position, speak glibly (and dishonestly) of a transformed or new regional order. In reality, the situation has worsened. Israel has accelerated its war on Gaza, its violent land-grabbing in the West Bank and occupations and deadly bombings of Lebanon and Syria. Meanwhile, Palestinians are without inspired leadership capable of projecting a strategic vision. Instead, they are mired in the muck of failed ideologies or imposed structures of governance. Before anyone can speak of a transformed Middle East, two things must occur: Israel's occupations and out-of-control brutal behaviour must be stopped, and new Arab leadership must emerge that can project a vision for the future that can inspire and transform the politics of Lebanon, Syria and Palestine. This discussion of vision reminds me of a meeting I had a decade ago at my office with the leader of the Syrian National Coalition. Our exchange was pleasant and yet unmemorable – until he was about to leave. He paused at the doorway and turned to ask me: 'What is your long-term vision for the region – from Iraq to Lebanon? And what do you see for us in the next three years?' These are exactly the questions that should be asked and answered by leaders on all levels of government and civil society across the Middle East. It is critically important to have a broad strategic vision of the future that embodies the values and aspirations of your people. And it is equally important to be able to project how that vision can be implemented in the short term. It is critically important to have a broad strategic vision of the future that embodies the values and aspirations of your people My initial response was a bit flippant, saying that looking 100 years down the road I can see an Arab boy from Amman marrying an Israeli girl from Tel Aviv and taking a job and settling down in the suburbs of Damascus. I quickly added that what I meant was that I envisioned a region at peace with itself, with integrated societies, economies, and open borders (or no borders at all) allowing for the free movement of people and commerce. Given the bloody wars of the past several decades and continuing tumult and tension, such a vision might appear fanciful. Naysayers will go so far as to argue that it is not in the genetic makeup of either side to ever accept peace or integration. But I'm convinced they are wrong. No group of people is uniquely indisposed to peace and integration, and no people are immune from the inevitable pressures of history. In this regard, the Middle East is no exception. It's true that the region is plagued by war and upheaval, but which region of the world hasn't been so plagued? The same despair was once widespread across Europe. That continent had, for centuries, been the setting for bloody conflicts pitting nations and sects against each other, culminating in the 20th century's two devastating World Wars. Who, in the midst of those horrors, could have imagined a Europe at peace with itself? In the past few decades, Europe formed an economic union and then ended a Cold War that had divided the continent. Though still not a 'perfect union', the profound and positive transformations that have occurred and are still unfolding across that once-tormented region are impossible to ignore. What is important is that, in the midst of conflict, people be given a vision of the future and the possibility of change, precisely so that they do not surrender to despair. Projecting such a vision can inspire and motivate societies to move forward, rejecting the paralysis that comes from feeling trapped by present-day 'realities'. By projecting a progressive vision of the future, leaders are also able to present a stark contrast between the idea of the world they seek to create with notions advocated by those operating without such a vision. When applied to the conflicts raging across the Levant, the matter becomes clearer. What, for example, would be Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 's or Hamas 's visions of the future? And who would want to live in the future projected either by the past or current Syrian leadership? Is there anyone who hopes that 100 years from now Lebanon is still divided by sect, with power monopolised by the same families who have governed their clans or regions for the past century? Having a progressive vision of the future allows one to challenge those who can't think beyond the dead-end constraints of the present. It rejects those who for reasons of power and personal privilege want to freeze current realities or elevate them to the status of the eternal, and those whose blasphemous distortions of religion cause them to envision the future as a return to an idealised past. Thinking about the future means we do not create 'false idols' of the past or present, or become so arrogant that we project our ideologies onto God, seeking to validate our whims and fancy. It also requires that we reject the temptation to use means that contradict the very ends we seek to accomplish. This leads me to consider my Syrian friend's second, no less important question: to envision the Levant in three years' time. This more difficult challenge forces us to directly confront the constraints of the present. I believe that 100 years from now there will be no latter-day 'Al Assad' on the scene, no 'religious' fanatics tormenting the 'less pure,' and no clan leaders or ultra-nationalists – precisely the characters who define life today. They must be defeated, but how they are defeated matters. That's why a future vision based on values is important. Fighting evil with evil, repression with repression, and fanaticism with fanaticism, are no-win propositions. New ideas matter and so do means by which to bring those ideas to life. I thank my Syrian friend for asking his thoughtful questions and for the discussion that followed. It provided us both with an opportunity to reflect on means, ends and goals. The very fact that he asked these questions made me appreciate his leadership. I would love to hear this challenge put to other leaders, on all levels, across the Levant. Their answers would be revealing.
ARN News Center
3 hours ago
- ARN News Center
25 nations condemn Israel over 'inhumane killing' of Palestinians
A group of 25 Western countries including Britain, France and Canada said that Israel must immediately end its war in Gaza and criticised what they called the "inhumane killing" of Palestinians, including hundreds near food distribution sites. The countries in a joint statement condemned what they called the "drip feeding of aid" to Palestinians in Gaza and said it was "horrifying" that more than 800 civilians had been killed while seeking aid. The majority of those killed were in the vicinity of Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) sites, which the US and Israel backed to take over aid distribution in Gaza from a network led by the United Nations. "The Israeli government's aid delivery model is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity," the countries' foreign ministers said in a joint statement. "The suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths." The call by about 20 European countries, as well as Canada, Australia and New Zealand, for an end to the war in Gaza and the delivery of aid comes from many countries which are allied with Israel and its most important backer, the US. Among those calling for an end to the war are four out of five countries in the so-called Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, which includes the US. Israel's foreign ministry said the statement was "disconnected from reality" and it would send the wrong message to Hamas. "The statement fails to focus the pressure on Hamas and fails to recognise Hamas's role and responsibility for the situation," the Israeli statement said. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar later said he spoke with his British counterpart David Lammy on Monday on regional issues, including Gaza. He blamed Hamas "for the suffering of the population and the continuation of the war". The US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, called the statement "disgusting" and said blaming Israel was "irrational" because Hamas rejects every proposal to end the war. The plea from the other Western nations came as Israeli tanks pushed into southern and eastern districts of the Gazan city of Deir al-Balah for the first time on Monday. Much of Gaza has been reduced to a wasteland during more than 21 months of the war on Gaza that began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies. Israel's campaign in Gaza has killed more than 59,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities, with the latest deaths reported on Monday as Israel began a new incursion in central Gaza. The countries behind the statement said Israel was denying essential humanitarian assistance and called on the country to comply with its obligations under international humanitarian law. They urged Israel to immediately lift restrictions to allow the flow of aid and to enable humanitarian organisations and the UN to operate safely and effectively. They added they were "prepared to take further action to support an immediate ceasefire and a political pathway to security and peace" for Israelis and Palestinians.
Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Hamas 'proceeding with responsibility and rationality' in negotiations
In a statement issued late on Monday evening local time in Gaza, the Hamas political bureau said it is "exerting all our efforts and energies around the clock to end this escalating suffering" in Gaza, which it called a "top priority" for its leadership. "While we recognise the extent of the blackmail practised by the occupation through committing massacres against our people - in a desperate attempt to extract concessions it has failed to impose at the negotiating table - we affirm that we are proceeding with responsibility and rationality, and with the utmost speed possible, in completing our consultations and communications with Palestinian forces and factions, in order to reach an honourable agreement that leads to stopping the aggression, ending the genocide, and achieving our people's goals of reconstruction," the group said.
