I didn't get a chance to watch tv news last night, and as a consequence missed this segment of Rachel Maddow's show in which she points to various contradictions regarding Joe Lieberman's current stance on the Obama administration position on Yemen, prompted by the failed bomber incident, and then goes on to interview NBC News correspondent Richard Engel to provide some background.
America's War With Yemen
I apologize for not providing a transcript, but it is not available as yet.
She does bring up the release of two of the now leaders of "Yemeni Al-Qaeda" under Dick Cheney, and speaks of "America's other other other War".
I am certainly not a Middle East expert, nor scholar. Others here are better equipped to handle those discussions. I have an interest in national ethnic or religious minorities in areas like Yemen solely as an anthropologist, spurred by my contact with, and study of groups like the Kabyle, and Tuareg-Amazigh people's in Algeria and other areas of North Africa.
I am perturbed however, by conflating events in Yemen with Iran (for example) simply because the Zaidi Houthis are a subbranch of Shia Islam, and by the role of the powerful Saudi's in US foreign policy, and the military backing we give to them in the region.
Middle East commentator Rannie Amiri noted recently in
Saudi Arabia’s Attack on Yemen
The Saudi attack on northern Yemen is the epitome of military adventurism and opportunism. It allows them to use – for the first time – advanced weapons purchased from the United States against an ill-equipped band of rebels in the midst of a destitute, malnourished, and displaced population
The staid Middle East Institute editor's blog noted back in September the building of a Houthi sub-text:
A couple of weeks back I noted that the fact that so much of the (Sunni) Arab media was presenting the Houthi revolt in northern Yemen as a Shi‘ite/Sunni conflict (even though the President of Yemen is himself a Zaydi like the Houthi rebels), and that this was really a distortion of the situation. Now some of the unspoken agenda behind the broad brush treatment of Zaydis as Shi‘ite (which they are, with lots of footnotes) is becoming clear as not only the Saudi media but other Arab media not following the Saudi line (such as Al-Jazeera) begin to beat the drum of Iranian involvement in the Houthi rebellion.
It is an interesting read.
Amnesty International - Yemen points to human rights aspects of the complex situation in Yemen, and human rights abuses and violations from multiple quarters.
Those US politician's who will now use the pretext of the recent botched bombing, to target Yemen as our next "war" are hell-bent on repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results, imho.
Gregg Carlstrom writes in :
Propping up Saleh won't solve Yemen's problems
a critique of the Lieberman stance:
Last word I'll write about the Detroit plot today, I promise. There's other stuff happening in the Middle East, much of it more interesting (and the subject of more media attention) than a lone idiot with an incendiary device. But this I couldn't resist. Sen. Joe Lieberman took to the airwaves this morning to declare Yemen "tomorrow's war," and endorsed preemptive military action as the solution. It can't be tomorrow's war if it's already today's war! George Orwell would be proud.
Ali Abdullah Saleh
Lieberman's remarks are not surprising, given his general predilection for starting wars in Muslim countries. They're also totally insane, and Spencer Ackerman does a good job explaining why -- that is, until this paragraph:
Perhaps I've conceded too much to Lieberman's frame by responding in this way, but oh well. For a saner set of policy options that might be considered for Yemen, see this recent paper by Andrew Exum and Richard Fontaine.
He goes on to these conclusions:
I hate it when analysts analogize one country to another, but I think a comparison to Pakistan is instructive here. The U.S. spent most of this decade propping up the Musharraf government: He received a lot of military aid, a lesser amount of civilian aid, and a great deal of support on the world stage. And it was a totally counterproductive strategy: Pakistan is more unstable than ever, and America's public image is tarnished, perhaps irreparably, in the eyes of a whole generation of Pakistanis.
Supporting the Saleh government will produce the same outcome. The U.S. has very little leverage over Saleh; it cannot impel him to approve political reforms and focus on economic development. So Yemen's government will go on being violent and oppressive, and the U.S. -- in exchange for a massive aid package -- will get a limited amount of counterterrorism assistance.
This is the kind of crudely transactional international relations that infuriates people in the Muslim world. And it's ultimately counterproductive, because it leaves in place the root causes that allow countries to become "breeding grounds" for terrorism. But it seems to be emerging as the default liberal "solution" to Yemen.
I do still have some friends in that part of the world, and even received a call this morning from a friend in Iran; was grateful to know they were okay, since we have had no email contact in the last few days. They too raised the issue of Yemen, but from an Iranian progressive perspective.
I am interested in hearing from those of you who are better informed, or who have spent more time on this region, and where you think we need to go as Democrats (albeit diverse ones) in framing positions on Yemen.