Extinguishing Yemen Fire

Yemen is strategically located on the Bab al-Mandab strait (a narrow waterway linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden) through which much of the world's oil shipments pass. The Arab countries and Saudi Arabia fear a “Houthi takeover” would threaten free passage through the strait. The Houthis are members of a rebel group, also known as Ansar Allah (Partisans of God), who adhere to a branch of Shia Islam known as Zaidism. And, Zaidis make up one-third of the population and ruled North Yemen under a system known as the imamate for almost 1,000 years until 1962.
The Houthis take their name from Hussein Badr al-Din al-Houthi. He led the group's first uprising in 2004 in an effort to win greater autonomy for their heartland of Saada province, and also to protect Zaidi religious and cultural traditions from perceived encroachment by Sunni Islamists.

Yemenis tried their best to avoid war by offering avenues for a peaceful agreement, but the Houthi terrorists continued with their campaign to control the cities of Yemen.
According to source, “When the Iran backed-Houthis were on the verge of taking control of Aden, the legitimate government’s call to intervene under Article 51 of the UN had to be heeded.”
In the ongoing battle for sphere of influence in the region, Saudi Arabia wants to stop any rise of Iranian influence across the Middle East. Also, the Arabs are looking up to Saudi Arabia to effectively confront Iran’s expansionist designs in the region. While Riyadh had been working along with other like-minded states in a peaceful way to prevent unnecessary escalation. Nevertheless, the Iranian leaders thought that they could destabilize Yemen, change the balance of power in the Gulf region, and get away with it.

Amid the current chaos, Islamabad has hinted at calling upon the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to play a role to end the conflict in Yemen. The 57-member OIC, which is often criticised for its ineffectiveness, is dominated by Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Malaysia and Iran.
Saudi Government had already put forward a formidable coalition to reverse the gains of the Iranian-backed Houthis and to hit them hard so that they understand that their actions are intolerable. The ongoing action against Iran’s proxy is intended to make Iran change its course, as Iran instructed the Houthis to drive all of their Sunni opponents out of politics and to control Yemen.
The Saudi-led “Operation Decisive Storm” is not only targeting the Houthi rebels but also Iran’s ambitions of expansion in the region.
Supported by the International law, the military intervention in Yemen did not begin until all other attempts to stop the Houthi rebels from taking over Yemen had been exhausted.

A 10-nation, Saudi-led coalition is currently carrying out air strikes against rebels in Yemen.
The strikes are in support of President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, who fled after gains by the Shia Houthi rebels.
Furthermore, Arab League chief said, “the Saudi-led offensive against the Houthis would continue until the militia withdraws and surrenders its weapons."
The main fight is between forces loyal to the beleaguered President, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, and those allied to Zaidi Shia rebels known as Houthis, who forced Mr Hadi to flee the capital Sanaa in February.

Yemen's security forces have split loyalties; some units back Mr Hadi, and others are with the Houthis and Mr Hadi's predecessor Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has remained politically influential. Mr Hadi is also supported in the predominantly Sunni south of the country by militia known as Popular Resistance Committees and local tribesmen.
After rebel forces closed in on the president's southern stronghold of Aden in late March, a coalition led by Saudi Arabia responded to a request by Mr Hadi to intervene and launched air strikes on Houthi targets.

The conflict between the Houthis and the elected government is also seen as part of a “regional power struggle” between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia, which shares a long border with Yemen.
Gulf Arab states have accused Iran of backing the Houthis financially and militarily, though Iran has denied this.
President Hadi, who is recognised as Yemen's legitimate leader by the international community, managed to escape to Aden, which he declared the de facto capital.
Cautious Pakistani resistance to the idea of getting involved in Yemen or even on Saudi soil is in the headlines all over.

However, Pakistan (recipient of 17 billion dollars from the KSA) owes a lot to Saudi Arabia in times of military needs. Yet, at the same time, Islamabad has to maintain its neighborly relations with Tehran.
Whatever the case maybe, it is time for the Pakistani government to publicly and clearly set out what it is and is not willing to do in Yemen or on behalf of Saudi Arabia and on what terms and for which reasons.

Available options:
If Saudi Arabia is under threat, Pakistan cannot stay neutral, however, the best option is to act defensively staying inside the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, because the Houthi rebels are Muslims who respect Mecca and Medina too, and there is very slim chance that they will even get closer to these places.
Pakistan should send a delegation to Iran and try to help end this conflict by acting as a neutral umpire.
Saudi Arabia should stop dragging Pakistan into their hate club against Iran! Pakistan should stay neutral and discourage a war between Shias and Sunnis.
The Houthi militants need to understand that they are Yemenis in the first place. At the end, it is in their best interest to reach a political solution.
=======================================================================
Resources:
www.wikipedia.com, www.dawn.com, www.arabnews.com, www.bbc.com,www.nation.com.pk,www.thenews.com.pk

The Looming Threat of Regional War

Fortunately, in the stormy Mid-East, the extended era of autocratic rulers is collapsing on fast track basis; nevertheless, the related surgeries are extremely painful and unbearable. Maybe, the possible international armed conflict over Syria situation relieves some, while it scares the local population for the possible collateral damage in case there is no negotiated settlement before it’s too late.

After two and half years of his alleged brutality towards the rebels and the killing by chemical attack to shut any opposition voices, Assad is actually fast-inching towards his own collapse. The death toll is alarmingly on the rise. The government troops have not been able to defuse the severe blows from the rebels. The various sources claim that 1,429 died from the attack just on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb for which both sides are blaming each other and there is evidence of chemical attacks as well.



Obviously, the embattled Syrian regime faces a strong rebellious force, but Assad's government is in denial mode; it keeps blaming the rebels for the sad episode of chemical attack. Indeed, the rebels have been actively engaged in pushing for the overthrow of Syrian Ruler.

With respect to deadly chemical attack, the UN inspection team awaits for lab results on tissue and soil samples it collected from the scene.

The media coverage has been causing a further divide in the Middle East based on sectarian lines. The Shiite Iran backs Assad; while the non Shiite Arab Gulf allies are supporting the rebels wanting the West to retaliate to oust the Moscow backed Assad.

Now, it seems as if the cold war-style tensions between the Western powers and Moscow are fast re-emerging.

The Syrian use of sarin gas has angered Saudi Arabia, the Arab League, the US, the Great Britain, France and some western countries.

The US being in the driver’s seat wants all allies on board despite the reluctance on the part of a few countries. President Obama appears to be reluctantly ready for a limited action, only after full-fledged backing from the law makers on Sept 9, 2013, he will gain strength. "What we are envisioning is something limited. It is something proportional. It will degrade Assad's capabilities," Obama said. "At the same time we have a broader strategy that will allow us to upgrade the capabilities of the opposition."

Many people want Mr Obama to share the collected evidence of Syrian involvement in chemical attack with local and the international community to win more support for his action.

Although, Obama won some support of the key members in the U.S. Congress for the limited U.S. strikes on Syria to punish President Assad for his “suspected use” of sarin gas against the rebels, there remains a question mark on the legality of any military adventure on his part. Assad specifically denies deploying poison gas to kill civilians.



Republican John Boehner, current Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor did pledge their support to the commander in chief for military action. The voting in Senate and the House would take place next week, yet the Republican-led House is not easy; most probably, it would be a real challenge for Mr. Obama.



The militant rebels are asking the Western allies to send them more weapons and use their air power to end the prolonged war that has killed more than 100,000 and made millions homeless. Aid agencies continue to deal with the swelling humanitarian crisis in the region of two million refugees.



The United States, France, Australia, Britain and Canada believe the regime of President Bashar Assad is to blame for a chemical weapons attack against innocent Syrian civilians two weeks ago.

Obama seems to be comfortable going forward without the approval of a UN Security Council. Since Obama believes the organisation has been too paralyzed to hold Assad accountable.



"The risks for global peace and security that the present Syria crisis represents, I'm sure, are not smaller than what we have witnessed in any other crisis that we have had since the Vietnam war," said Guterres, a former Portuguese prime minister.

Russia, backed by China, has used its veto power in the U.N. Security Council three times to block resolutions condemning Assad's government and threatening it with sanctions.



More than 2 million Syrians have already crossed borders for refuge creating a humanitarian crisis.

However, the war advocates do face the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who said any punitive action against Syria could unleash more turmoil and bloodshed, and advised that such strikes would be legal only in self-defense under the U.N. Charter or if approved by the organization's Security Council. He urged caution.



Russia and China have repeatedly used their veto power in the council to block action against Assad. Russia has been steadfastly opposed to any military action without the approval of the United Nations Security Council, and has expressed doubts about the source of the attack.



"We think history should teach us that we should be waiting for the UN report to come through, and so we're not in support of what they're contemplating right now in the U.S.," said Canadian MP Mr Dewar (NDP), referring to the faulty intelligence that led to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq a decade ago.

President Obama plans to use the G20 gathering to drum up some material support for a military strike among some of the group's more reluctant leaders.



On the contrary, Robert Fox, executive director of Oxfam Canada, welcomed the renewed diplomatic efforts of the foreign ministers that headed to St. Petersburg this week.



Truth is military action will destroy the chances of a negotiated settlement of the Syrian crisis leading to further fueling the growing Shia-Sunni tensions sweeping the region.



The best way out is a joint US-Russian venture to bring Syria’s warring sides to the negotiating table to bring a viable peace in the region because the conflicts are only ended by negotiation and compromise.

The fact is, just a few people benefit from wars; those who do they end up getting treasure of wealth.

I agree with Bertrand Russell who said, “War does not determine who is right - only who is left.”