Yemeni President Hadi: rebels are ‘stooges of Iran’ – BBC
By regional standards, Saudi Arabia and its
allies moved like lightning to intervene in Yemen. Countries outside the Arab
League have also pledged to throw in their lot if needed, including Turkey and
Pakistan. Compare this burst of energy with the sluggish (or non-existent in some
cases) regional response to ISIS. And yet the Islamic State is surely a much
greater regional threat than a bunch of renegades grabbing power in one of the
world’s poorest, least influential and most shambolic nation-states, hardly
worthy of the epithet, occupying the bottom end of the Arabian Peninsula. So
why the flurry of activity? What threat do the Houthi pose that ISIS doesn’t?
The only way to get a handle on what is
happening in Yemen is by analysing events through the lens of the ages-old
Sunni vs Shia struggle. Shortly after
the death of the Prophet Mohammed, there was a major schism in Islam that saw the
emergence of the Shia branch of the religion. Ever since then, the two strands
of Islam have been at loggerheads and vying for domination. The struggle is an
asymmetric one as Sunnis vastly outnumber Shias in most Muslim countries. But
the formation of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979 gave the Shia a centre of
power and Teheran has been flexing its muscles ever since. The expression ‘Shia
Crescent’ describing the swathe of territory in which Iran has influence was
coined by King Abdulla of Jordan 10 years ago.
The Iranian-backed Houthi are Shia, and the countries that have taken up arms against
them are Sunni (or led by Sunni political elites). Right next door to Yemen is
Saudi Arabia, the global centre of Sunni Islam. The establishment of an arm of
the Shia Crescent right on the border of Saudi Arabia is a poke in the eye the
Saudis and their Sunni brethren can’t not
respond to.
ISIS are Sunni extremists, but Sunni
nonetheless. It is an open secret that ISIS is largely a creation of sections
of the Sunni elites of the Gulf countries who provided the financial and
logistical means that enabled it to present a real threat to the whole region
(and beyond). Whatever their excesses, ISIS were useful by cutting across the
Shia Crescent – and not far from the borders of arch-rival Iran. Now, through trying
to establish an Iranian satellite in Yemen, Teheran is giving Riyadh (whom they
hold ultimately responsible for ISIS) a dose of their own medicine.
Yemen has been one country only since 1990,
before which it was divided into two separate nation-states, the Yemen Arab
Republic (North Yemen) and the People’s
Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen). The marriage
never worked all that well owing to tribal divisions and alliances and their
ideological concomitants. I think we may be seeing a de facto divorce in the near future leaving the north as an unruly,
largely ungoverned and indeed ungovernable place – just perfect as a base for the
likes of al-Qaida (already well established there) and ISIS (who have a foot firmly
in the door).
The Islamic State’s days are numbered. Mosul
will be retaken within months and Raqqa will likely follow a few months later,
thereby erasing ISIS from the map (if not erasing the movement, which has been
actively seeking to establish new nuclei in Libya and Yemen). All this has been
made possible in part through Iranian intervention. I suspect the Houthi will find themselves in a
parallel position of losing their territorial power base in south Yemen thanks
to Saudi intervention.
With the south of the country secure and in
friendly (i.e. Sunni) hands, I doubt whether Saudi Arabia and its mates would
have any great appetite for going after rebels, be they Shia or Sunni, in the
north – they really don’t want their very own version of the Afghanistan debacle
on their hands. So they’d bolster their border security but leave the anarchic
shambles on the other side thereof under the control of warlords and jihadis and their assorted militias to
stew in their own juice and hopefully engage in incessant internal warfare.
Which, given the Sunni/Shia mix, they almost certainly would.
The West is supportive of Saudi Arabia and its
allies in taking action against the Houthi
because the West shares their Sunni allies’ goal of containing Iran. The
disintegration of Yemen and the emergence of a new stomping ground in its north
for the West’s mortal jihadist enemies may be the upshot. However, the
disintegration of a failed state that never amounted to much is no skin off
anyone’s nose, while that lawless territory created by it is nothing all that
new either judging by the fact that al-Qaida is already a fixture there. Militarily
powerful Saudi Arabia will moreover be as keen on containing the mixture of
threats it poses as are the Western powers, especially given the Iranian
interest in their back yard. From a Western strategist’s point of view, the
unfolding scenario is far from an unfavourable one. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves
– Middle Eastern crystal balls are notoriously unreliable.
Barend Vlaardingerbroek BSc (Auckland), BA, BEdSt (Queensland), DipCommonLaw,
PGDipLaws (London), MAppSc (Curtin), PhD (Otago), is associate professor of
education at the American University of Beirut and a regular contributor to
Breaking Views on geopolitical and social issues. Feedback welcome at bv00@aub.edu.lb.
1 comment:
Yemen.... Islam on the March.
Enjoyed your analysis, especially in conjunction with Dr Smith’s Blog.
The one factor that stands out is when, not if, Saudi Arabia defeats the Iran “Houthi” will this pose a further threat to trade passing through the Red Sea and the Canal? Also will the Saudi’s forgo the chance to “elect” a puppet state in the Yemen to ensure “that control of their vital interests” is maintained! Watch this space.!!!!!
In my comment to Dr Smith’s Blog it would be prudent to “Let them fight it out among themselves...forever if possible”. If not, our best alternative would be to adopt Baden Powell’s slogan as far as the future is concerned “Be Prepared”.
Brian
Post a Comment