The usual suspects tried everything against Yemen.

First, coercing it into ‘structural reform.’ When that didn’t work, they instrumentalized takfiri mercenaries. They infiltrated and manipulated the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), ISIS. They used US drones and occasional marines.

And then, in 2015, they went Total Warfare: a UN-backed rogue coalition started bombing and starving Yemenis into submission – with barely a peep from the denizens of the ‘rules-based international order.’

The coalition – House of Saud, Qatar, UAE, US, UK – for all practical purposes, embarked on a final solution for Yemen.

Sovereignty and unity were never part of the deal. Yet soon the project stalled. Saudis and Emiratis were fighting each other for primacy in southern and eastern Yemen using mercenaries. In April 2017, Qatar clashed with both Saudis and Emiratis. The coalition started to unravel.

Now we reach a crucial inflexion point. Yemeni Armed Forces and allied fighters from Popular Committees, backed by a coalition of tribes, including the very powerful Murad, are on the verge of liberating strategic, oil and natural gas-rich Marib – the last stronghold of the House of Saud-backed mercenary army.

Tribal leaders are in the capital Sanaa talking to the quite popular Ansarallah movement to organize a peaceful takeover of Marib. So this process is in effect the result of a wide-ranging national interest deal between the Houthis and the Murad tribe.

The House of Saud, for its part, is allied with the collapsing forces behind former president Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, as well as political parties such as Al-Islah, Yemen’s Muslim Brotherhood. They have been incapable of resisting Ansarallah.

A repeat scenario is now playing in the western coastal port of Hodeidah, where takfiri mercenaries have vanished from the province’s southern and eastern districts.

Yemen’s Defense Minister Mohammad al-Atefi, talking to Lebanon’s al-Akhbar newspaper, stressed that, “according to strategic and military implications…we declare to the whole world that the international aggression against Yemen has already been defeated.”

It’s not a done deal yet – but we’re getting there.

Hezbollah, via its Executive Council Chairman Hashim Safieddine, adds to the context, stressing how the current diplomatic crisis between Lebanon and Saudi Arabia is directly linked to Mohammad bin Salman’s (MbS) fear and impotence when confronted with the liberation of strategic Marib and Hezbollah’s unwavering support for Yemen throughout the war.

A fabricated ‘civil war’

So how did we get here?

Venturing beyond the excellent analysis by Karim Shami here on The Cradle, some geoeconomic background is essential to understanding what’s really going on in Yemen.

For at least half a millennium before the Europeans started to show up, the ruling classes in southern Arabia built the area into a prime hub of intellectual and commercial exchange. Yemen became the prized destination of Prophet Muhammad’s descendants; by the 11th century they had woven solid spiritual and intellectual links with the wider world.

By the end of the 19th century, as noted in Isa Blumi’s outstanding Destroying Yemen (University of California Press, 2018), a “remarkable infrastructure that harnessed seasonal rains to produce a seemingly endless amount of wealth attracted no longer just disciples and descendants of prophets, but aggressive agents of capital seeking profits.”

Soon we had Dutch traders venturing on terraced hills covered in coffee beans clashing with Ottoman Janissaries from Crimea, claiming them for the Sultan in Istanbul.

By the post-modern era, those “aggressive agents of capital seeking profits” had reduced Yemen to one of the advanced battlegrounds of the toxic mix between neoliberalism and Wahhabism.

The Anglo-American axis, since the Afghan jihad in the 1980s, promoted, financed and instrumentalized an essentialist, ahistorical version of ‘Islam’ that was simplistically reduced to Wahhabism: a deeply reactionary social engineering movement led by an antisocial front based in Arabia.

That operation shaped a shallow version of Islam sold to western public opinion as antithetical to universal – as in ‘rules-based international order’ – values. Hence, essentially anti-progressive. Yemen was at the frontline of this cultural and historical perversion.

Yet the promoters of the war unleashed in 2015 – a gloomy celebration of humanitarian imperialism, complete with carpet bombing, embargoes, and widespread forced starvation – did not factor in the role of the Yemeni Resistance. Much as it happened with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The war was a perverse manipulation by US, UK, French, Israeli and minions Saudi, Emirati and Qatari intel agencies. It was never a ‘civil war’ – as the hegemonic narrative goes – but an engineered project to reverse the gains of Yemen’s own ‘Arab Spring.’

The target was to return Yemen back to a mere satellite in Saudi Arabia’s backyard. And to ensure that Yemenis never dare to even dream of regaining their historic role as the economic, spiritual, cultural and political reference for a great deal of the Indian Ocean universe.

Add to the narrative the simplistic trope of blaming Shia Iran for supporting the Houthis. When it was clear that coalition mercenaries would fail to stop the Yemeni Resistance, a new narrative was birthed: the war was important to provide ‘security’ for the Saudi hacienda facing an ‘Iran-backed’ enemy.

That’s how Ansarallah became cast as Shia Houthis fighting Saudis and local ‘Sunni’ proxies. Context was thrown to the dogs, as in the vast, complex differences between Muslims in Yemen – Sufis of various orders, Zaydis (Houthis, the backbone of the Ansarallah movement, are Zaydis), Ismailis, and Shafii Sunnis – and the wider Islamic world.

Yemen goes BRI

So the whole Yemen story, once again, is essentially a tragic chapter of Empire attempting to plunder Third World/Global South wealth.

The House of Saud played the role of vassals seeking rewards. They do need it, as the House of Saud is in desperate financial straits that include subsidizing the US economy via mega-contracts and purchasing US debt.

The bottom line: the House of Saud won’t survive unless it dominates Yemen. The future of MBS is totally leveraged on winning his war, not least to pay his bills for western weapons and technical assistance already used. There are no definitive figures, but according to a western intel source close to the House of Saud, that bill amounted to at least $500 billion by 2017.

The stark reality made plain by the alliance between Ansarallah and major tribes is that Yemen refuses to surrender its national wealth to subsidize the Empire’s desperate need of liquidity, collateral for new infusions of cash, and thirst for commodities. Stark reality has absolutely nothing to do with the imperial narrative of Yemen as ‘pre-modern tribal traditions’ averse to change, thus susceptible to violence and mired in endless ‘civil war.’

And that brings us to the enticing ‘another world is possible’ angle when the Yemeni Resistance finally extricates the nation from the grip of the hawkish, crumbling neoliberal/Wahhabi coalition.

As the Chinese very well know, Yemen is rich not only in the so far unexplored oil and gas reserves, but also in gold, silver, zinc, copper and nickel.

Beijing also knows all there is to know about the ultra-strategic Bab al Mandab between Yemen’s southwestern coast and the Horn of Africa. Moreover, Yemen boasts a series of strategically located Indian Ocean ports and Red Sea ports on the way to the Mediterranean, such as Hodeidah.

These waterways practically scream Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and especially the Maritime Silk Road – with Yemeni ports complementing China’s only overseas naval base in Djibouti, where roads and railways connect to Ethiopia.

The Ansarallah – tribal alliance may even, in the medium to long term, exercise full control for access to the Suez Canal.

One very possible scenario is Yemen joining the ‘string of pearls’ – ports linked by the BRI across the Indian Ocean. There will, of course, be major pushback by proponents of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ agenda. That’s where the Iranian connection enters the picture.

BRI in the near future will feature the progressive interconnection between the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) – with a special role for the port of Gwadar – and the emerging China–Iran corridor that will traverse Afghanistan. The port of Chabahar in Iran, only 80 km away from Gwadar, will also bloom, whether by definitive commitments by India or a possible future takeover by China.

Warm links between Iran and Yemen will translate into renewed Indian Ocean trade, without Sanaa depending on Tehran, as it is essentially self-sufficient in energy and already manufactures its own weapons. Unlike the Saudi vassals of Empire, Iran will certainly invest in the Yemeni economy.

The Empire will not take any of this lightly. There are plenty of similarities with the Afghan scenario. Afghanistan is now set to be integrated into the New Silk Roads – a commitment shared by the SCO. Now it’s not so far-fetched to picture Yemen as a SCO observer, integrated to BRI and profiting from Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) packages. Stranger things have happened in the ongoing Eurasia saga.

thecradle.co

By Alan MACLEOD

“The war in Yemen must end,” declared President Joe Biden in his first major foreign policy speech; “and to underscore our commitment, we are ending all American support for offensive [Saudi] operations in the war in Yemen, including relevant arms sales.”

Yet studying sales records from the Department of Defense (DoD), MintPress can reveal that less than one year into his presidency, the Biden administration has already approved 20 separate weapons contracts, worth just shy of $1.2 billion, to Saudi Arabia alone. This includes a $100 million shipment of Black Hawk helicopters, support for Apache gunships, and a $78 million deal to buy 36 cruise missiles. A new and controversial $650 million deal announced earlier this month has yet to be finalized but will likely soon follow, boosting sales up to levels equal with the earlier years of the Trump presidency.

The Saudi-led Coalition is once again pummelling Yemen’s capital, Sana’a. Images appear to show U.S.-made aircraft attacking ground targets. This is hardly surprising: American arms sales to Saudi Arabia have long been a point of contention. But this MintPress investigation will reveal the extent to which private American companies are profiting off the infliction of suffering on the Yemeni people.

Sorting through thousands of approved contracts, the Department of Defense has approved in excess of $28.4 billion worth of sales from American companies to the armed forces of Saudi Arabia since they began their military intervention in the Yemeni Civil War in March 2015. This includes billions of dollars worth of arms, supplies, logistical support and training services.

While this is a gargantuan number (already larger than Yemen’s gross domestic product), it is certainly a serious underestimate of just how much the military industrial complex is benefiting from what the United Nations has called the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis.” In addition to the $28 billion figure, Saudi Arabia is also a named customer (often along with other nations) in weapons deals worth more than $34 billion over the same period. However, the amounts the Saudis actually paid in these were not disclosed, though in some of these orders Saudi Arabia was clearly the primary buyer. For example, a $3.4 billion DoD-approved radar deal with Raytheon lists only two buyers: Saudi Arabia and the tiny nation of Kuwait (population 4.2 million).

Added together, this means that the DoD has greenlighted the sale of somewhere between $28 billion and $63 billion worth of arms from American companies to Saudi Arabia since the latter began its attack on the largely civilian population of Yemen.

How Saudi State Media Feeds Fake News to Israeli, Western Audiences

Of course, the U.S. was supplying the Saudis well before the war started and also continues to sell billions of dollars worth of weapons to other partners in the Saudi war on Yemen, such as Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Therefore, this number only begins to tell the story of corporate American war profiteering.

While selling weapons of war to such a repressive government was already ethically questionable, by March 2015 there was no way one could credibly argue that arms sales to Saudi Arabia would be used in a purely defensive manner. Nevertheless, they continued to grow, fueling the violence. From March to December 2015, sales to Saudi Arabia totalled $1.56 billion. But under Trump, that number ballooned to $5.47 billion in 2019 and $14.36 billion in 2020. Facing increased opposition even inside Washington, Trump even used his presidential veto to unblock an $8.1 billion deal.

Although the Biden administration has not overseen the bonanza fire sale its predecessor oversaw, the flow of arms has not stopped.

“President Biden said we were going to see an end to U.S. complicity in the Saudi war and blockade on Yemen. Unfortunately, this new $650 million weapons sale perpetuates both war and the blockade that’s pushing millions of Yemenis into famine,” said Hassan El-Tayyab — Legislative Director for Middle East Policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a pro-peace lobbying group associated with the Quaker movement — adding:

These air-to-air munitions, combined with other forms of military aid, send a message of impunity to the Saudis as they continue their destructive behavior in Yemen with no consequences from key allies like the United States… Now is not the time to be greenlighting new arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Now is the time to use existing U.S. leverage to end the Saudi blockade before more Yemenis are plunged into famine.

Data compiled by MintPress shows a sharp decline in sales under the Biden administration

Calling the roll

The biggest profiteer from Yemen’s destruction has been aviation giant Boeing, which brought in $13.9 billion in sales over the period. Next comes Lockheed Martin, which has signed 62 separate contracts with the Kingdom since March 2015, worth in excess of $7.4 billion. Third on the list is missile expert Raytheon, which has cashed in on the violence to the tune of $3.3 billion.

Boeing’s spot at the top of the pile comes in large part thanks to a massive, $9.8 billion contract signed last year to maintain and modernize Saudi Arabia’s fleet of 269 McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle fighter jets, including changing out hardware components, updating software and improving weapons systems (McDonnell Douglas is a subsidiary of Boeing). 2020 was a great year for the company, as it also secured a $1.97 billion fee to provide 650 SLAM ER cruise missiles to the Saudi government.

Lockheed Martin has scored big with the Saudi Navy, making billions of dollars, including a nearly $2 billion contract to build four warships. In addition, it secured enormous sales of Patriot missiles and laser and infrared technology. Black Hawk helicopters made by its subsidiary Sikorsky (treated by the DoD as a separate entity) were also in high demand.

Meanwhile, many of Raytheon’s largest deals include air-to-ground missiles, guided bombs, and widespread logistical, planning and technical support.

Slices of the American pie

The top 10 war profiteers supplying the Saudis with arms are as follows (with the total value of contracts in parentheses):

• Boeing ($13,879,225,733)
• Lockheed Martin ($7,423,287,331)
• Raytheon ($3,306,032,077)
• Sikorsky ($650,701,270)
• PKL Services ($557,629,505)
• S&K Aerospace ($566,435,631)
• DynCorp International ($232,878,635)
• AITC-Five Domains JV ($183,584,909)
• L-3 Communications Corp. ($178,569,672)
• Kratos Technology and Training Solutions ($115,408,312)

For full information, including links to all grants, see the attached viewable spreadsheet.

Reading the approved sales, what becomes clear is the depth of U.S. involvement in virtually every aspect of the Saudi military. Of course, there are direct arms shipments. But there are also contracts for helmets and a wide range of equipment, intelligence services, maintenance arrangements, and even for English lessons for Saudi pilots to help them better use their aircrafts’ features.

While the offensive is widely known as the Saudi-led attack on Yemen, in reality, U.S.-made aircraft — armed with American missiles and bullets, maintained by American crews and flown by pilots trained by American operatives — hit targets selected by U.S. intelligence. All of this is done under political and diplomatic protection by Washington, which blocks attempts by regional organizations to mitigate the destruction and shields Saudi Arabia from international consequences. This, in other words, is an American attack on Yemen.

“It is inconceivable that the Saudi-led Coalition could be carrying out its attacks without the support of these companies,” Kirsten Bayes of the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) told MintPress via email; “Western-made weapons have been central to a bombardment that has destroyed schools, hospitals and homes and created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. It is long past time for arms shipments to the Saudi-led Coalition to be brought to an end.”

In total, 86 U.S. companies have profited from sales to Saudi Arabia since its intervention in Yemen, including household names like General Electric, Booz Allen Hamilton and Honeywell. The full list is also available in the accompanying spreadsheet.

Death for sale – $50,000 apiece!

Counting the value of the contracts is relatively straightforward. Counting the dead is not. One recent estimate, however, put the cumulative death toll from the conflict at over 560,000. If that is the case, American companies have made about $50,000 in sales per death. The Saudis have deliberately targeted Yemeni infrastructure, including hospitals, farms and sewage plants. Oxfam calculated that attacks on health and water facilities have taken place on average every 10 days since the conflict began.

It is beyond doubt that American arms are in part to blame for the carnage. In the first two years of fighting alone, pieces of Raytheon weapons were found at 12 different sites where civilians had been targeted. Meanwhile, fragments of Boeing Joint Direct Attack Munition bombs were identified in the wreckage of a marketplace that had been targeted, killing 107 civilians, including 25 children. Not to be left out, 500-pound MK-82 bombs built and supplied by Lockheed Martin were used in an infamous 2018 attack on a school bus, killing 40 children, and a 2016 strike on a funeral hall that left 240 dead. The company’s unexploded cluster munitions also litter the country, likely causing casualties for years or decades to come. The U.S. is the only major Western nation not to have signed the 2008 convention banning the production and use of cluster bombs.

For almost seven years, Saudi forces have maintained a naval and aerial blockade of Yemen, cutting it off from the outside world. “The closure of Sana’a Airport has been devastating for Yemen, driving up the prices of life-saving medicines and humanitarian aid, and preventing mercy flights for tens of thousands of critically ill Yemenis who need emergency treatment abroad,” El-Tayyeb told MintPress.

Fragments of one of the MK-82 bombs used in an attack on a vegetable market in Hodeida, Yemen, October 25, 2018. Ibrahim Tanomah | MPN

Keeping the D.C. spigot stuck on open

Weapons manufacturers are well aware that their profits live and die on the decisions made by legislators. Lockheed Martin’s latest annual report makes that explicit. In a section entitled “other risks to our operations,” the Bethesda, Maryland-based outfit noted:

International sales also may be adversely affected by actions taken by the U.S. Government in the exercise of foreign policy, Congressional oversight or the financing of particular programs, including the prevention or imposition of conditions upon the sale and delivery of our products, the imposition of sanctions, or Congressional action to block sales of our products.”

“For example,” they state, “the U.S. Government has imposed certain sanctions on Turkish entities and persons as described in the risk factor below, and could act in the future to prevent or restrict sales to other customers, including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

Unsurprisingly, then, the military industrial complex has lobbied the government hard to continue supporting the violence. Ronald L. Perrilloux Jr., an executive with Lockheed Martin, denounced the wave of “patently false” “hostile media reports” about Saudi atrocities, described human rights laws as a “significant irritant,” and argued that the best thing to do is help the Saudis “finish the job” in Yemen by “provid[ing] them with the benefit of our experiences, with training of their forces, and probably replenishment of their forces.”

His counterpart at Boeing, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, agreed, arguing that weapons transfers were actually a force for stability. “When you sell somebody a big platform like an F-15, you build a 30-plus-year relationship with that air force,” he said.

BAEing for blood

If the public had their way, U.S. involvement would cease. A 2018 poll found that 82% of respondents wanted Congress to act to halt or decrease arms shipments to Saudi Arabia. American law already bans the sale of weapons to human rights abusing countries, but this legislation is constantly ignored (conservative estimates suggest Washington is supplying military aid to almost three-quarters of the world’s dictatorships).

According to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, around three-quarters of all Saudi military purchases come from American companies. Much of the rest comes from Great Britain. Riyadh’s top ten suppliers since 2015 are as follows (with percentage of total sales in parentheses):

• United States (74%)
• United Kingdom (12%)
• France (4%)
• Canada (2%)
• Spain (2%)
• Germany (1%)
• Italy (1%)
• China (1%)
• Switzerland (1%)
• Turkey (<1%)

The British figure is dominated by BAE Systems, which has closed deals worth over $24 billion with Saudi Arabia since it began bombing Yemen, documents obtained by the CAAT show. CAAT’s Bayes told MintPress:

BAE Systems’ U.K.-made Typhoon and Tornado aircraft have been central to Saudi Arabia’s devastating attacks on Yemen. BAE Systems also has 6,300 employees in Saudi Arabia supporting the Saudi Air Force as part of the British-Saudi Defence Cooperation Programme, and we know [it] sends weekly shipments by air to the Saudi armed forces from its own private airport.

How Britain Aids Saudi Massacres in Yemen, with Phil Miller

Thus, while a figure between $28.3 billion and $63.0 billion is already monstrous, it tells only part of the story. The likes of Boeing, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin were already supplying the Saudi government with weapons long before the conflict began — Boeing since 1945, Lockheed Martin since 1965, and Raytheon since 1966. American arms companies continue to supply other members of the Saudi-led Coalition with similar arms. That number will continue to rise, as deals negotiated with the Trump administration come to fruition.

Therefore, the true extent to which the military industrial complex is profiting off some of the most extreme suffering in the world is still not completely clear. All that is known is that the Saudis pay in petrodollars and the Yemenis pay in blood.

mintpressnews.com

By Ziad HAFEZ

In 2016, the Arab National Conference made the assessment that Saudi Arabia would be facing a future of hard choices due to their fast-changing policies and positions. Events have since proved them right. Riyadh today faces tough decisions on the future orientation of its domestic and foreign policies – some of which could affect the very existence of the ruling dynasty and its line of succession established almost a century ago.

Domestically, two crucial changes made recently could weaken the foundations on which Saudi Arabia was built.

One of these changes relates to the line of succession, which has traditionally been bestowed through the sons of the founding monarch, Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud. The succession allows only for the sons of this first king, all brothers and half-brothers, to accede to the throne in line with seniority, from eldest to youngest. The sons of these brothers are not successors to the throne.

This system has provided stability by avoiding rivalries among factions and the innate propensity for establishing lineage. However, the current King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, who succeeded to the throne via those founding principles, has effectively broken the rules by appointing his son Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) as crown prince, and thus establishing his own successive lineage.

To be fair, the old system has become increasingly difficult to implement as the second generation of princes is vanishing by attrition. As one may expect, this new appointment of King Salman’s son never sat well with the few remaining sons of the founding monarch.

However, MbS has managed to secure the endorsement of younger princes, and has consolidated his grip on power by systematically eliminating all those loyal to the former, now deposed, crown prince Mohammed Bin Nayef.

The second crucial change was implemented by MbS, when he chose to curb the influence of the clerical class who challenged his attempts to modernize the kingdom.

The firm grip of MbS on institutions that implement the observance of the Sharia, as defined by the clerical class, has allowed him to control the degree of social and cultural austerity that plagues Saudi society.

More pointedly, MbS issued a decree banning flogging in public, a significant landmark in interpreting penal rulings traditionally upheld in the kingdom. That ruling is likely to have far-reaching consequences in Islamic jurisprudence, already being addressed by scholars.

Antagonizing the clerical class may have strong support among the youth, especially those under 24 years of age who represent 51 percent of the total Saudi population of 35 million. However, the conservative nature of the population may balk at the speed of forced change.

The government is taking a big risk by undertaking difficult social and cultural reforms in a period of economic austerity. Damaging its alliance with the clerical class without having taken the time to establish a loyal middle class is akin to placing the cart before the horse.

MbS has managed to win several battles, such as granting women the right to drive, legalizing movie theaters, authorizing public, mixed-gender concerts, and creating touristic resorts on the Red Sea.

The crown prince has also cracked down on corruption and cronyism, by forcing princes of all ranks, businessmen, and others who have enriched themselves at the expense of the state, to return ‘illegitimately gained’ funds.

MbS’s most ambitious plan for the kingdom, however, is the construction of the city of Neom, touted as the future hub of technological innovation in the region. He also aims to reduce the kingdom’s dependence on oil. However, the economic infrastructure for such a shift is not in place, and will require a much longer time, and significant resources, to complete.

The question is, can these reforms continue if MbS’s economic policies do not provide the universal welfare state that the population has long enjoyed?

Saudi Arabia, by numbers

The kingdom enjoys the highest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 1.9 trillion US dollars in the region on a purchasing power parity  basis. Inflation was a moderate five percent in 2019. The per capita income is among the twelfth highest in the world at US$ 56,000. Income inequality is moderate with a Gini coefficient index of 45.9 (the lower the lever, the lower the inequality).

While there are some doubts about the accuracy of the index, it does, for all intents and purposes, show some inequality even though the issue has not yet been at the forefront of local grievances.

There are no statistics on poverty, and the government does not allow attention to this issue. Protests are forbidden and the media is strictly controlled and regulated. Freedom of expression as well as the traditional freedoms enjoyed in developed societies are lacking. But, overall, the Human Development Index (HDI) for the kingdom is very high (0.854), positioning at 40 out of 189 countries and territories.

The Saudization of the work force has not achieved its goals of lowering the unemployment among the kingdom’s citizens and especially the youth.

Expatriates once constituted 90 percent of the workforce in the private sector, while Saudi nationals constituted the bulk of state employment. The private sector can absorb up to 600,000 workers, but the workforce entering the market is over 1.5 million.

The IMF has issued a report saying that the government cannot sustain a policy of absorbing the incoming workforce. In 2017, about 700,000 foreigners left Saudi Arabia because of high fees on expatriate workers, yet unemployment rose to 12.9 percent, though some estimates are much higher.

The Saudi domestic workforce lacks the necessary skills and willingness to learn and adapt to the standards required by private companies. The domestic population has grown sevenfold since 1960, but its resources do not match that growth. Saudis are facing the reality of oil reserves depletion, with no new fossil fuel discoveries in sight. Oil reserves in Yemen may have been one reason for Riyadh’s aggression against its southern neighbor, but the results have been disastrous for the Saudis on every level.

Riyadh’s ability to economically provide for the needs of its population is challenged by an unstable energy market and the erratic policies of the government.

For instance, at the height of the war on Yemen, the crown prince decided to pump more oil into the market, leading to diminished oil prices and therefore government revenues. Stabilizing the market meant dealing with Russia at the great displeasure of the United States.

Furthermore, the war on Yemen has significantly drained the kingdom’s coffers, necessitating the imposition of austerity measures. Resurging oil prices have provided a small cushion of foreign reserves estimated at 500 billion US dollars, which allow Saudi Arabia’s credit ratings to remain high.

Given its erratic financial stability, ambitious domestic economic plans are likely to be further delayed due to the disastrous Saudi decision to launch an unnecessary, treasury-draining war on Yemen. The expectations of achieving a decisive victory within weeks or months, thereby cementing MbS’s legitimacy and competence, proved to be tragically misplaced.

Riyadh is now contemplating a humiliating defeat that has already delivered a blow to the crown prince’s carefully crafted image. The expected fall of the city of Marib in Yemen is likely to seal the fate of the war in the coming few weeks.

War, insecurity, and a region in flux

This unanticipated outcome has led Saudi decision makers to revisit old policies and strategies, and to examine new ones. Most importantly, the ruling dynasty has to ensure its security.

For the last 76 years, that protection was ensured by the United States. In exchange for a steady supply of oil, Washington protected the Saudi dynasty from the turmoil in the region caused by the establishment of Israel, communism and left-wing activism, and later, the ascendence of rival political Islamism.

The Saudi wars on Syria and Yemen, as well the financing of jihadi movements against Iran and its regional allies, were a major departure from the traditional Saudi quiet diplomacy of bribing opponents and bankrolling intellectual mercenaries and media outlets.

In a surprising admission, MbS has acknowledged the exportation of Wahhabism to many parts of the world upon the request of western governments and in order to provoke sedition and dissent within the Muslim and Arab world. Does this mean that the kingdom will forego its policy of arming jihadists as it did in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya?

It may be too early to tell, but if MbS distances himself from the extremism of Wahhabism, then at some point, the past policy of arming jihadists will become a liability significant enough to threaten the dynasty. It may have already started to do so.

Saudis today want to know if US security continues to be reliable. The question remains at the center of the kingdom’s preoccupations.

For Washington, whatever use the kingdom might have once served to US foreign policy is today a subject of ‘introspection’ by the administration of President Joe Biden. Suddenly, ‘morality’ has become a factor in the alliance with the ruling Saudi family. The murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi seems to have made MbS unpalatable to President Biden, although not enough yet to curtail large weapons sales.

To date, no contact between President Biden and MbS has taken place. That trend started with US President Barack Obama but was flipped on its head during the administration of Donald Trump. Furthermore, the mood in the US Congress is getting significantly cooler toward the Saudi ruling dynasty in general, and MbS in particular.

The strategic weakness of the US at the domestic level as well as the erosion of its once military, economic and financial global dominance means it is no longer able to honor its defense commitments to its partners.

Riyadh has sensed this change, especially in the aftermath of the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan, with little or no notice provided to even its NATO allies.

The 2020 electoral defeat of Donald Trump was a further setback to the crown prince and his regional aspirations. Suddenly left without protection guarantees, MbS was forced to reassess both his alliances and enmities.

New friends, old foes, or just leave it to geography?

Engagement with Iran under the sponsorship of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi was one outcome of his recalibration. While it is too early to say whether the talks will succeed, echoes from Iran seem positive, whereas Riyadh remains circumspect.

Saudi King Salman’s declaration of the need to have good relations with neighboring countries is a notch significantly below the warmer term ‘brotherly,’ but still, a softer stance than in previous declarations. The rivalry for the leadership of the Islamic world is still very much in play.

Discussions with Tehran undoubtedly involve the war on Yemen. So far, Riyadh is still not willing to concede defeat, and developments on the ground show it is still putting up a fight. If Marib falls – an almost certainty – the game will be over. What face-saving deal could be arranged is not clear at this stage.

Will the Iranians show some leeway? Will the Houthis, formerly allied to the House of Saud during the heyday of Arab nationalism, be accommodating? The issue is no longer what kind of control the kingdom may retain in Yemen but what kind of relations will emerge.

Geography will have its say and force an accommodation of some sort as the kingdom cannot ignore the strategic position of Yemen at the entrance of the Red Sea – nor can Yemen ignore the larger neighbor it has on its northern and eastern borders.

In terms of armaments, the kingdom has started discussions with the Chinese and the Russians, a turn of events not appreciated in Washington. The impending defeat in Yemen is also a stain on the performance of US defense weaponry that could not prevent or repel the rocket attacks on oil fields in the kingdom.

The cheaper and more efficient Russian and Chinese arms systems have suddenly become more attractive to Riyadh. This does not necessarily mean a severance of ties with the US, but rather, a diversification of supply sources and an accompanying increase in Russian and Chinese influence. At this stage, the US cannot but stand helpless in this turn of events.

Such moves by the Saudi kingdom are likely to forge increased cooperation with the Eurasian block, and could result in Saudi Arabia joining Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Ultimately, the security of West Asia and the Persian Gulf cannot be maintained by the US or NATO, but by the regional powers in ascendence. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is likely to increasingly take the lead role in all of Asia.

In September, Saudi Arabia’s main regional rival, Iran, fully joined the now nine-member SCO and Afghanistan is an observer nation. The Saudis will want to be part of this influential powerhouse, but should be reminded that Iran has the veto power to nix any new applicant.

The kingdom is also revisiting its position in Syria and Lebanon, although in opposite directions. In Syria, it is edging closer towards a resumption of relations with the government of President Bashar Assad, whereas in Lebanon it is aggressively pursuing an alliance with the right-wing Lebanese Forces (LF) and Arab tribes against the Lebanese resistance Hezbollah, President Michel Aoun, and Prime Minister Najib Mikati.

Hezbollah remains an extremely sore spot for Riyadh, and local Lebanese political parties traditionally allied to Riyadh do not have the clout or numbers to counter the group – which handily won the popular vote in the 2018 elections – despite the huge amounts of Saudi money made available to them.

In just the past few days, the Saudis have recalled their ambassador to Lebanon, sent the Lebanese envoy packing, barred imports from the Levantine state, and urged their Gulf allies – the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain – to follow suit. Facing a humiliating loss in Yemen, MbS has turned his wrath on yet another weak Arab state. Some habits die hard.

The most critical issue for the stability of the region remains the Palestinian struggle with the Israeli occupation. Saudi Arabia has not hidden its hostility toward the Palestinian resistance; instead showing outright disdain by imprisoning leading members of Hamas who have lived in the kingdom for several decades.

However, despite a ‘Deal of the Century’ – that later morphed into the Abraham Accords – which other Gulf neighbors quickly signed onto, the Saudis have not yet taken the step towards normalization with Israel.

Strong resistance within the Saudi kingdom appears to have influenced the decision to avoid a step considered offensive to most Arabs and Muslims around the world. Repercussions could have been significant had the caretakers of Islam’s two holiest cities ‘normalized’ relations with Israel.

Given the inherent instability of the kingdom due to the changes promoted by MbS, the spectacular failure in Yemen, and the increasing strength of the Resistance Axis in the region, it is unlikely for Saudi Arabia to normalize with Israel any time soon. The question is, where do Riyadh and MbS go from here, as Saudi Arabia’s regional, domestic and international prospects diminish?

thecradle.co

By Rick ROZOFF

The past week has witnessed reports of increased Turkish military activity in Iraq and Syria as well as its intruding itself deeper into the war in Yemen. In all three cases Ankara has pitted itself against forces that are or can be seen to be pro-Iranian: Shiite parties in northern Iraq, the government of Syria and the Houthi-led government in Yemen.

Direct tensions between Turkey and Iran have been increasing since last year over the above three nations as well as the Turkish-directed attack on Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan (Turkey and Azerbaijan identify themselves as “one nation, two states’) and its aftermath.

Each time the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has rushed to Turkey’s defense over the past eighteen years – holding Article Four consultations four times (one time to “protect” it against Iraq, three times against Syria), maintaining three Patriot anti-ballistic missile batteries since 2013 – it has referred to the nation as NATO’s southeastern border. In addition to Turkey having the largest population and the largest military of any NATO member state except for the U.S., it is also the only member of the military bloc to border countries in the Middle East and the Caucasus: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Turkey has invaded the first and third and participated in a near-invasion against the fourth. (Last September a Turkish F-16 shot down an Armenian SU-25, killing its pilot.)

The U.S. maintains B61 nuclear bombs in Turkey under a NATO nuclear sharing/burden sharing arrangement which mandates that the host country provide aircraft to deliver the bombs. NATO also has its Joint Command Southeast and Allied Air Component Command headquarters in Turkey. It moved its Allied Land Command to Turkey in 2012. In the same year it installed a Forward-Based X-Band Transportable anti-missile radar facility with a range of 2,900 miles. This year it handed over the command of its Very High Readiness Joint Task Force to Turkey.

Nothing Turkey does in the Middle East, the Caucasus, North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean can be seen aside from its status as a NATO member. Nothing it has done and is doing in those locations has ever been criticized by NATO.

On April 23 Turkey’s military launched Operations Claw-Lightning and Claw-Thunderbolt in northern Iraq, claiming to have destroyed over 500 targets in attacks that included strikes from warplanes, drones and artillery and airdropping paratroopers and commandos from Chinook and Black Hawk helicopters.

On May 1 Turkey’s Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu announced that Turkey will construct a military base in Iraq, ostensibly to combat the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), stating, “Just like we did in Syria, we will establish bases and control the area.”

The leader of the al-Nahj al-Watani party in the Iraqi parliament, Ammar Ta’meh, denounced Turkey’s “expansionist plans,” stating they would further vitiate already strained relations between the two countries and “bring harm and loss to everyone.”

In addition to the PKK, Turkish military forces in northern Iraq have increasingly come into conflict with pro-Iranian Shiite groups, leading to direct engagements as well as to worsening the antagonism between Ankara and Tehran.

In February the Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Turkish ambassador to Iran, Derya Örs, to express grave concerns over the Turkish interior minister accusing Iran of harboring PKK fighters. Iran condemned the remark as being “unacceptable” and a violation of protocols befitting cooperation and good relations between nations.

The Foreign Ministry also communicated objections to comments by Turkey’s ambassador to Iraq (see below), with the government news agency adding, “the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of countries were stressed as the fortifying base of international relations.”

Later the same month Turkey summoned the Iranian ambassador to condemn remarks by Tehran’s ambassador to Iraq, Iraj Masjedi, accusing Turkey of violating Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity – which is the simple truth – with ongoing cross-border military operations. His words were: “We reject military intervention in Iraq and Turkish forces should not pose a threat to violate Iraqi soil.”

Turkey’s ambassador to Iraq, Fatih Yildiz, responded in a tweet with: “Ambassador of Iran would be the last person to lecture Turkey about respecting borders of Iraq.”

The Turkish accusations against Iran center in part on claims that Iranian units of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PNF) were in some – truly convoluted – manner affiliated with PKK fighters in northern Iraq. And on the contention of Turkish Foreign Minister Soylu, as seen above, that Iran was harboring “525 terrorists.” He didn’t indicate how he had determined the exact figure.

Almost two months before the current Turkish offensive in Iraq, Iraqi news reports stated that Popular Mobilization Forces militias were deploying three brigades in the Sinjar district of the Nineveh Governorate in northern Iraq to confront Turkish incursions. It was also reported that “the PMF has deployed 15,000 fighters and built new bases in Sinjar to counter any Turkish military threat.”

Another proxy conflict between Turkey and Iran is in Yemen. Recently Abdul Wahab Al-Mahbashi, member of the Supreme Political Council in Yemen, the executive body of the Houthi-led government based in Sanaa, warned Turkey against further military involvement in his nation. He predicted that Turkey, like its new ally Saudi Arabia, would be defeated in any attempt to do so, stating, “If Turkish soldiers enter Yemen they will have a fate worse than that of the aggressors who preceded them.”

Recent reports claim that Turkey has unloaded twenty armored vehicles and equipment at Somali ports to be shipped to the Yemeni port of Qena for Saudi-backed Islah militias.

From the beginning of the horrific catastrophe inflicted on the Yemeni people by Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and their allies, the perception has existed that at root the crisis there was in part a Saudi-Iranian proxy war. Turkey has now entered that conflict on behalf of Saudi Arabia and against Iran.

In a recent report by the Middle East Monitor based on regional press accounts it was suggested that Turkey will replicate in Yemen what has proven effective for it in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. A two-pronged strategy of drone warfare and importing Islamist mercenaries. The Shaam Times reported that 300 Syrian fighters have joined the ranks of the Islah militia in Marib, the last stronghold of Saudi-backed forces in the north of Yemen.

Turkish drones were used extensively in Libya and against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia, and Turkey has now provided Bayraktar TB2 drones to Ukraine for the war in the Donbass. The Middle East Monitor feature indicates that Turkish drones have already been used in Yemen.

Abdul Wahab Al-Mahbashi, the above-cited Yemeni official, warned that Turkey could deploy troops to his country, in which case “Invading Yemen will not have a happy ending for Erdogan himself as well as the country’s government and military,” or could repeat what it did in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh by deploying mercenaries.

During last year’s war by Azerbaijan and Turkey against Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenian, Syrian and Russian officials and other sources warned of Turkey deploying thousands of Syrian and other mercenaries, as many as 4,000, to Nagorno-Karabakh.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of Armenia as an independent nation in 1991, Iran has had no closer or more reliable ally in the world. The Azerbaijani-Turkish war against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia last year was then also a message to Iran. In two ways. First, its closest ally was attacked and humiliated. Second, a war to “liberate” ethnic Azeris was a warning to Iran itself, where as many as 18 million ethnic Azeris reside.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was the guest of honor at the postwar victory parade in the capital of Azerbaijan on December 10, where among other matters he praised Enver Pasha, one of the key architects of the Armenian genocide of the last century, and read a poem condemning the “division of Azerbaijani territory” between Iran and Russia in the 1800s.

As a result of Erdoğan’s incitement in Baku, the Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned Turkey’s ambassador to Tehran. “The Turkish ambassador was informed that the era of territorial claims and expansionist empires is over,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry said on its website.

“Iran does not allow anyone to meddle in its territorial integrity.”

In addition to Turkey’s proxy wars with Iran in Iraq, Yemen and the Caucasus, there is also that in Syria. As the Turkish interior minister acknowledged above, Turkey has troops and bases in the north of the country. Its military incursions have displaced tens if not hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians. In the past week Syrian news sources have reported that:

The governor of Raqqa, Abdul Razzaq Khalifa, accused Turkey of reducing the water supply from the Euphrates River to Syria from 500 to 200 cubic meters per second, contrary to a 1987 agreement not to reduce the rate to under the first level, “which prevented the operation of the turbines from generating electricity produced in the Euphrates Dam, in addition to reducing irrigation and drinking water.”

Syrian Arab News Agency places the event in the context of continued military attacks by Turkey and mercenaries under Turkish control.

An explosive device was triggered in the city of Ras al-Ayn “where Turkish occupation forces and their terrorist mercenaries” operate.

The Turkish military and its mercenary allies fired a barrage of rocket and artillery shells against several villages in the northern Aleppo countryside and near the Meng Military Airport.

Two pro-Turkish fighters were killed in internecine fighting in the city of Jarablus.

By expanding military attacks against Iran’s few allies in the world – in Iraq, in Yemen, in Armenia, in Syria – Turkey is spearheading the West’s campaign to isolate, contain and confront Iran.

Anti Bellum

By Ahmed ABDULKAREEM

March 26 marks the sixth anniversary of the U.S.-backed Saudi bombing campaign in the war-torn country of Yemen and massive demonstrations took place across the country on Friday in commemoration.

Hundreds of thousands of people took the streets in the Yemeni capital of Sana’a near the besieged Sana’a International Airport, and in Hodeida, home of the country’s largest and most important seaport. In fact, thousands of Yemenis gathered in more than twenty city squares across the northern provinces, carrying Yemeni flags and holding banners emblazoned with messages of steadfastness and promises to liberate the entire country from Saudi control. Images of the demonstrations show a sea of Yemeni flags, posters bearing pictures of Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, and the slogan “Six years of aggression — We are ready for the seventh year — We will win.”

“We are here to send a message to both the United States and Saudi Arabia that we are ready to make more sacrifices against the Saudi-led Coalition,” Nayef Haydan, a leader of the Yemeni Socialist Party and member of the Yemeni Shura Council, said. “Any peace initiative must contain a permanent end to the war, lift the blockade completely, include a detailed reconstruction program, and compensate Yemenis,” he added.

Having bombed for six years, Saudis now talk peace

For six years, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two of the richest countries on the planet, have relentlessly bombed the poorest nation in the Middle East, with crucial assistance from three consecutive U.S. administrations. For 2,160 days — six years straight — the Royal Saudi Air Force and the UAE Air Force have, with American assistance, launched nearly 600,000 airstrikes in Yemen. The bombing has targeted civilian homes, schools, hospitals, roads, funerals, food facilities, factories, mosques, water, pumps and sewage, markets, refugee camps, historical cities, fishing boats, fuel stations, a school bus full of children, and Bedouin camps, making any potential reconstruction very long and costly.

The bombing continues even as talks of new peace initiatives begin to surface. Just last Sunday, March 21, consecutive Saudi airstrikes destroyed a poultry farm in Amran province. The attack was especially egregious as Yemen is suffering from one of the most severe famines in recent history. In fact, the country faces a humanitarian, economic, and political crisis of a magnitude not seen in decades. According to the United Nations, almost 16 million Yemenis live under famine, with 2.5 million children suffering from malnutrition. And thousands of Yemeni state workers now face hunger as their salaries have gone unpaid for years after the Saudi Coalition seized control of the country’s central bank.

Relentless destruction

As the war enters its seventh year, the country’s war-weary masses face grim new milestones. The fastest growing outbreak of cholera ever recorded and outbreaks of swine flu, rabies, diphtheria and measles are among the man-made biological threats facing Yemen. Meanwhile, hundreds of Yemenis are dying of Covid-19 every day amid a collapsed and destroyed health system. Many of these diseases and crises are not natural but have been created, artificially and intentionally, by Saudi Arabia. The U.S.-backed Saudi Coalition has completely or partially destroyed at least 523 healthcare facilities and bombed at least 100 ambulances, according to a report from the Sana’a-based Ministry of Health issued last Tuesday.

Years after Saudi Arabia imposed a blockade on Yemeni ports, halting life-saving supplies, Yemenis are still suffering from a lack of food, fuel and medicine. Hodeida Port, which is the primary entry point for most of Yemen’s food imports, is still under a strict Saudi blockade; even humanitarian aid is prevented from reaching the port. Sana’a International Airport, which has been bombed heavily by the Saudi Air Force in the past two weeks, has been blocked almost since the war began, leaving thousands of medical patients to die prematurely because they were unable to travel abroad for treatment.

Yemenis for their part, have resorted to targeting the Saudi Coalition in its own backyard. Hoping that taking the battle to the Kingdom will exact enough of a toll on the Saudi monarchy to cause it to rethink its quagmire in Yemen, Houthi missiles and drones have had increasing success in striking Saudi oil infrastructure, airports and military bases, leaving Saudi soil exposed to daily bombardment for the first time since the Al Saud family established their state.

In a recent statement, the spokesman for the Ansar Allah-backed Yemen Army claimed that its Air Force had carried out more than 12,623 drone strikes and reconnaissance operations during the past six years and that, in the past two months alone, 54 high-precision ballistic missiles have been fired at vital Saudi targets, some of them deep inside Saudi Arabia.

Last Wednesday, Saudi Arabia’s Abha Airport was attacked by a number of drones, and on Friday, a facility belonging to Saudi state-owned oil giant Aramco in the Saudi capital of Riyadh was hit with six drones, causing damage to the facility, according to Yemen military sources.

Saudi futility

Despite its enormous onslaught, lethal Western weapons, and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on this war, Saudi Arabia has been unable to crush the will of the Yemeni people, who continue to fight for independence and sovereignty. At the end of March 2015, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman promised confidently that it would all be over within a few weeks and that Ansar Allah would quickly surrender. Now, after six years of war, Bin Salman has not only been unable to defeat The Houthis. Instead, it is The Houthis remain steadfast in their resistance and have grown even more powerful, leading to much consternation in Saudi Arabia and a half-hearted attempt by Bin Salman to ask The Houthis to accept his country’s version of peace and free the Kingdom from the quagmire it has created for itself in Yemen.

As Yemenis make their final push to recapture the strategic city of Marib, amid failed U.S. efforts to protect their Saudi ally from Houthi ballistic missiles and drones, both Washington and Riyadh have presented peace initiatives in an effort to stem the tide of Saudi Coalition military defeats. Those initiatives, however, fail to address or alleviate the humanitarian plight of Yemenis, end the war, or even lift the blockade.

Sour wine in new bottles

On March 12, U.S. Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking announced an initiative to end the war during a webinar with the Atlantic Council. The plan is essentially a recycled version of a previous proposal presented by Mohammed Bin Salman and the Trump administration one year ago in Oman, dubbed “The Joint Declaration.” It contains a matrix of Saudi principles and conditions aimed at the surrender of the Yemen Army, the Houthis, and their allies, in exchange for an end to the war. Lenderking’s initiative gives no guarantee that the Coalition will take any measures to lift its blockade and end the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

On March 22, Saudi Arabia announced its own “ceasefire initiative” to end the war it announced from Washington D.C. six years ago. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan revealed the initiative, which would include a nationwide ceasefire under the supervision of the UN and a partial re-opening of the Sana’a International Airport to certain destinations. It also included a revenue-sharing plan that would guarantee the Saudi government access to a portion of the wealth generated by Yemen’s oil and gas deposits in Marib.

Come back when you’re serious

Both initiatives were rejected by Sana’a. “We reject the American and Saudi peace initiatives because they do not meet the demands of the Yemeni people,” Khaled Al-Sharif, chairman of the Supreme Elections Committee, said of the proposals during a meeting held in Sana’a on Monday. According to many Yemenis, including decision-makers in Sana’a, the U.S. and Saudi plans are not intended to achieve peace, but to advance their political goals in the face of an imminent military failure following six costly years of war. The measures, according to officials in Sana’a, are also about saving face and presenting an untenable plan, so that when it is inevitably rejected the tide of public opinion will turn in favor of the Saudi-led Coalition.

In a live televised speech commemorating the sixth anniversary of the war on Thursday afternoon, ِAbdulMalik al Houthi, the leader of the Houthis, refused Washington and Riyadh’s initiatives, explaining:

The Americans, the Saudis, and some countries have tried to persuade us to barter the humanitarian file for military and political agreements. We refuse that.

Access to oil products, food, medical and basic materials is a human and legal right that cannot be bartered in return for military and political extortion.

We are, [however], ready for an honorable peace in which there is no trade-off for our people’s right to freedom and independence or to Yemen’s legitimate entitlements.”

The Houthi leadership views the policies of the Biden administration as not far removed from those of his predecessor, Donald Trump. “Biden’s administration is following the same policies as those of former President Donald Trump. [They] have not offered a new plan for peace in Yemen. Washington has rather presented an old plan for the resolution of the conflict,” Ansar Allah spokesman Mohammed Abdul-Salam said, adding that the U.S. plan does not offer anything new. ”The plan has placed conditions for the opening of the Hodeida port and Sana’a International Airport, which are unacceptable,” he concluded.

No retreat, no surrender

The Houthis — empowered by six years of perseverance amid one of the most violent wars against some of the world’s most powerful military forces, not to mention the ability to reject the proposals set forth by those same powers — have little incentive to accept Riyadh’s offer. They see the end to the conflict coming from Washington in the form of an announcement of an immediate ceasefire, a departure of all foreign forces from the country, and lifting of the air and sea blockade as a pre-condition for any deal. “They should have demonstrated their seriousness for the establishment of peace by allowing food and fuel to dock at the port of Hodeida rather than put forth proposals,” Mohammed Ali al-Houthi said.

Over two thousand consecutive days of war have proven that Saudi Arabia is not ready to bring peace to war-torn Yemen. With the exception of a fragile ceasefire in Hodeida and a small number of prisoner releases, negotiations between the two sides generally reach a dead end, as Bin Salman looks for total surrender and nothing else. Numerous negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Yemen have failed, including UN-brokered peace talks in Switzerland in 2018. The Yemenis, who are now on the offensive, are unlikely to retreat or surrender. The offensive to recapture oil-rich Marib and sweep the shrinking areas that remain in Saudi control shows no signs of slowing down and, according to high-ranking military officials, the Saudi-controlled gas-rich province of Shabwa will be the next to be liberated. Moreover, retaliatory ballistic missiles and drone attacks against Saudi targets will continue.

Despite recent peace initiatives, the Saudi-led Coalition has only intensified military maneuvers in Yemen this week. Saudi warplanes are seen regularly above highly populated urban areas in the north of the country, dropping hundreds of tons of ordnance, most supplied by the United States. There is a near-consensus among the leadership of the Yemeni army and Ansar Allah that the current U.S. administration is participating in the battles taking place in the oil-rich Marib province. However, the Houthis have not directly accused the Biden administration of being involved in the fighting and are waiting for more evidence to do so. They may not have to wait long. On Tuesday, a sophisticated, U.S.-made MQ-9 Reaper drone was downed with a surface-to-air missile as it was flying over the Sirwah district in Marib.

mintpressnews.com

After six years of blowing up Yemen and blockading its southern neighbor, the Saudi rulers are now saying they are committed to finding peace. The move is less about genuine peace than economic survival for the oil kingdom.

The Saudi monarchy say they want “all guns to fall completely silent”. Washington, which has been a crucial enabler of the Saudi war on Yemen, has backed the latest “peace offer”. Secretary of State Antony Blinken this week endorsed the initiative from the Saudi rulers, saying he had spoken with them “on our work together to end the conflict in Yemen, facilitate humanitarian access and aid for the Yemeni people”.

The Saudi foreign ministry stated: “The initiative aims to end the human suffering of the brotherly Yemeni people, and affirms the kingdom’s support for efforts to reach a comprehensive political resolution.”

Can you believe this sickening duplicity from the Saudis and the Americans?

So, after six years of relentless aerial bombing in Yemen causing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, according to the United Nations, the Saudis and their American military supplier, seem to have developed a conscience for peace and ending suffering.

The real reason for trying to end the conflict is the perilous state of the Saudi oil-dependent economy. Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil, gas and petroleum industry, recently announced that its profits have slumped by nearly half in 2020 compared with the year before. Down from $88 billion to $49 billion.

Given that its oil economy provides nearly 90 per cent of state budget that is a stupendous hit on the Saudi finances. The Saudi rulers rely on hefty state subsidies to keep its 34 million population content. With income from the oil industry nosediving that means state deficits will explode to maintain public spending, or else risk social unrest from dire cutbacks.

Saudi Arabia remains the biggest oil exporter, but due to the Covid-19 pandemic and world economies going into recession crude oil prices have plummeted. At one point oil prices fell to around $20 a barrel. The Saudi economy needs an oil price of around $70 a barrel to reel in a profit.

The upshot is the Saudi war in Yemen has become a critical drain on state finances and potentially jeopardizing the superficial stability of the absolute monarchy.

Of further alarm is the increasing missile and drone attacks by the Houthi rebels in Yemen on key Saudi locations, including the capital Riyadh.

The Yemeni rebels are escalating airstrikes on Aramco installations at its headquarters in Dhahran and Dammam in Eastern Province, as well as in the cities of Abha, Azir, Jazan, and Ras Tanura. The targets include oil refineries and export terminals. The Saudis claim they have intercepted a lot of the missiles with U.S.-made Patriot defense systems. Nevertheless, the mere fact that the Yemenis can hit key parts of the Saudi oil economy over a distance of 1,000 kilometers is a grave security concern undermining investor confidence.

The first major strike was in September 2019 when Houthi drones hit the huge refinery complex at Abqaiq. That caused Saudi oil production to temporarily shut down by half. It also delayed an Initial Public Offering of Aramco shares on the stock market as investors took fright over political risk.

At a time when the Saudi oil economy is contracting severely due to worldwide circumstances, an additional debilitating threat is the intensifying campaign of Houthi airstrikes. They are taking the war into Saudi heartland.

The Biden administration has condemned the Houthi missile attacks on Saudi Arabia as “unacceptable”. Such American concern is derisory given how Washington has been providing warplanes, missiles and logistics for the Saudis to indiscriminately bomb Yemen causing tens of thousands of deaths. The Americans also enable the Saudis to impose a blockade on Yemen’s sea and airports, which has prevented vital food and medicines from being supplied to the country. Nearly 80 per cent of Yemen’s 30 million population are dependent on foreign aid deliveries. The blockade is a war crime, a crime against humanity, and the Americans are fully complicit.

President Joe Biden has said he is ending U.S. military support for Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen. It was an election promise. However, it is not clear what military support the U.S. has actually stopped, if at all. The Saudi bombing of food depots continues and the blockade on the country could not be maintained without essential American logistics.

More cynically, the Biden administration realizes that the Saudis started a war back in March 2015, when Obama was president and Biden was vice-president, that has turned into an un-winnable quagmire whose horrendous human suffering has become a vile stain on America’s international image.

That’s why Biden and his diplomats have been urging the Saudi rulers to sue for peace. Now it seems the Saudi monarchy realizes that the reckless war launched by “defense minister” Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has come with a price that they can’t afford to sustain if they want to preserve their rickety house of cards, known as the House of Saud.

On the latest peace proposal, the Yemeni rebels have rejected it out of hand. They say it contains “nothing new”. The Houthis say the only way to end the war is for the Saudis and their American sponsors to end the aggression on their country. There is no “deal”. It is a case of the Saudis and the Americans just getting out.

Meantime, the airstrikes on Saudi oil infrastructure are going to continue with ever-increasing damage to the royal coffers. Thus, the Saudi rulers have no choice but to unconditionally surrender in this criminal war. They are facing a humiliating defeat as the Yemenis take revenge and Uncle Sam washes his hands of blood.

“Disappointing” was how UN Secretary-General António Guterres described last week’s donor conference for Yemen.  The fifth UN Virtual High-Level Pledging Event for the Humanitarian Situation in Yemen resulted in pledges of only $1.7 billion.  That’s just half of the $3.85 billion called for by the secretary-general.  Nor is there any guarantee that donors will make good on their commitments.

How things have changed from just three years ago.  There were $2.01 billion in pledges in 2018, “100 per cent of which were fulfilled,” according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.  Pledges the following year rose to $2.6 billion.

Then came 2020.  That year’s pledges of $1.35 billion fell a billion dollars short of the UN goal of $3.4 billion.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates head a coalition that has been at war with Yemen’s Houthi rebels (Ansar Allah) since 2015.  The US criminally assists the coalition with intelligence, targeting assistance, spare airplane parts, arms sales, and (until November 2018) in-flight refueling for coalition warplanes.  The US-supported coalition seeks to restore the government of Yemeni President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, who was ousted by the Houthis in 2015.  Saudi and UAE airstrikes have killed some 20,000 Yemeni civilians since 2015.  Using starvation as a weapon, the coalition deliberately targets water treatment plants and food production facilities—a war crime.  Half of Yemen’s hospitals and medical clinics have been destroyed or forced to close.  Many health care workers go without pay.  The coalition bombs cranes used in Yemeni ports, making it impossible to unload desperately needed food, medicine, and fuel.  A coalition naval blockade prevents ships traveling to Yemen from docking for periods up to 100 days.  This delays urgently needed commercial and humanitarian shipments of food, fuel, and medicine from reaching Yemen’s people.

Bombing and blockade have combined to push Yemen to the brink of famine.  CNN senior international correspondent Nima Elbagir told Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman that food in Yemen has become unaffordable. Elbagir described seeing markets “full of food” being sold by “almost skeletal” vendors.  “The food was rotting,” Elbagir said, “because no one can afford to buy it.”

“Cutting aid is a death sentence”

It is a cruel irony that the US, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, which are destroying Yemen, are the same countries that Yemen most relies on for humanitarian aid.  Over the past two years, the Saudis, UAE, and US have all slashed aid to Yemen.

Following a $1 billion pledge in 2019, Saudi Arabia pledged only $500 million in 2020.  As of February 25, 2021, the Saudis had paid just $200 million.  This year, the Saudis pledged $430 million.  We’ll see how much of that the kingdom actually ponies up.

In 2019, the US provided $746 million, one fifth of all humanitarian aid going to Yemen.  Then in March, 2020, the Trump Administration slashed $73 million in aid for the Houthi-controlled north.  At this year’s donor conference on March 1, the US pledged a mere $191 million.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said afterwards that “cutting aid is a death sentence.”  Even before the war, Yemen was the poorest country in the Arab world.  Today, 80% of Yemenis, some 24 million people, relies on aid.  Two point three million Yemeni children suffer from acute malnutrition.  Food rations have been reduced by half for millions of Yemenis.  The $3.85 billion Guterres called for this year would feed 13-14 million Yemenis each month. Covid-19’s advent has only added to Yemenis’ suffering.

The reason the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and other donors give for slashing aid is Houthi obstruction of aid deliveries.  However, it’s hard not to think that Iran’s support for the Houthis is also a factor.  As the Trump Administration was heading out the door in January, it took time to designate the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (“FTO”).  The move alarmed aid organizations.  The FTO designation meant that anyone dealing with the Houthis, as aid organizations cannot avoid doing, would be subject to sanctions and criminal prosecution.

President Joe Biden lifted the FTO designation, but has not restored the Trump cuts to humanitarian aid for Yemen’s north.  The $191 million the US pledged last week does not include the $73 million in aid for the north the Trump Administration cut last March.

Several things need to happen immediately.  President Biden must follow through on his promises to end US support for coalition “offensive operations” and to “reassess” the US-Saudi relationship.  The near-unconditional support the US gives Saudi Arabia must end.  The Trump aid cuts must be restored and enough additional aid provided so that Yemen can avoid famine.

Dr. Aisha Jumaan, president and founder of the Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation, which provides humanitarian aid, says that “The Biden Administration has been given a rare chance to right past wrongs.  The Obama Administration, with Biden as vice president, supported the Saudi-led war on Yemen that created the largest humanitarian crisis in the world.  We must act now to save lives.”

counterpunch.org

By Ahmed ABDULKAREEM

SANA’A, YEMEN — A decade has passed since a massive popular uprising was sparked in Yemen by the wave of pro-democracy protests surging across the Middle East and North Africa known as the Arab Spring. The protests called for the overthrow of dictatorial regimes and sought democracy, sovereignty, and the elimination of poverty and unemployment. For Radwan Ali al-Haimi, a Yemeni youth and one of the leaders of the uprising, the hope for a new era of freedom and democracy cannot be crushed by Saudi Arabia and will come true with time.

In early 2011 — in a square in Yemen’s capital city of Sana’a just outside of Sana’a University, in an area dubbed Change Square — thousands of people gathered to demand the overthrow of Saudi-backed strongman Ali Abdullah Saleh, who had held power for more than three decades. The square was transformed into a sea of tents, flags, and banners. Despite the difference in their affiliations, all of the protesters slept, ate, chatted and chanted together, all the while peacefully calling for the end of a regime they viewed as corrupt, oppressive, and a mortgagee of Saudi Arabia.

The scale of the protests was rarely seen in Yemen before the uprising. “Our uprising aimed to overthrow the corrupt regime. We were looking to create a modern civil state, equality, a national army, sovereignty, and to liberate our homeland from Saudi tutelage,” Radwan — who had become a voice of the revolution — told MintPress.

A decade of oppression and destruction

For a decade, Saudi Arabia has worked to ensure Yemen’s steady dissolution from a nation hoping to transition to democracy during the Arab Spring to a nation fragmented by war and military intervention — a land of warring statelets, mass suffering, and despair. Today, Yemenis are living in worse conditions than they were before 2011, thanks in large part to Saudi oil riches.

While some leaders of Yemen’s youth-led revolution ended up as refugees or among the ranks of al Qaeda or ISIS, or as mercenaries of necessity allied with Saudi Arabia in order to earn a living, most continued their struggle for independence.

Many of the youth that participated in the uprising told MintPress that they place some blame on all of Yemen’s political forces for the failure of their movement, but most of their ire is reserved for Saudi Arabia.

“Saudi Arabia has crushed our revolution, turned our lives into hell because our uprising was interpreted by the ruling family as a threat to [their] influence and because of their fear of the revolution spreading to the Saudi interior,” artist Aisha Ali Saeed told MintPress. Aisha joined the youth revolution hoping for a decent life; instead, she now struggles to secure her next meal.

Bottling up the uprising

After the Arab Spring revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia took down their respective Saudi-backed strongman leaders, Riyadh devoted itself to encircling Yemen’s youth revolution there and maintaining its paternalistic role and influence over its southern neighbor. In fact, just months after the outbreak of the uprising (which bore the slogan of independence and sovereignty as one of its goals), Saudi Arabia flew Saleh and members of the youth-led opposition to Riyadh. A power-sharing political settlement was signed in November 2011 dubbed the GCC Initiative.

The initiative not only granted Saleh unconditional immunity, but it also replaced him with then-Vice President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi, who was more loyal to Saudi Arabia. Hadi, a southern military leader, had been appointed by Saleh in the wake of the 1994 war as a reward for betraying the South and likely because his inefficiency and weakness of personality posed little threat to Saleh. To this end, the GCC initiative included a number of anti-democratic mechanisms, including presidential elections with Hadi as the only name on the ballot.

Saudi Arabia’s claim of legitimacy for Hadi’s presidency is tenuous at best. In the wake of the one-candidate election in 2012, Hadi overstepped his mandate, which was supposed to be just two years long. His two-year term was extended for one year in 2014 and, following mass protests in the wake of rising fuel prices, Hadi fled the capital south to Aden and then eventually on to Riyadh after submitting his resignation to the House of Representatives. That resignation was used as a pretext to invite foreign intervention in March 2015. Now, Hadi’s term as propped-up president has become indefinite.

Youth and Houthi alliance

To many of the participants in Yemen’s youth movement, it was clear that their demands had been swept aside. Not only by the political parties known as “the Joint Meeting Parties” — led by the Islah Party, the Muslim Brotherhood’s branch in Yemen — but also by the United States and Saudi Arabia, which were pursuing their own agendas in Yemen and gave Hadi international legitimacy. Without an ally or a movement, many of the participants of the youth revolution did not stand by while their dreams faded. Instead, they decided to close ranks behind Ansar Allah (Houthis), a partner who rejected the GCC Initiative and saw it as little more than an attempt to crush the Arab Spring in Yemen.

The Houthis were committed to the principles of the revolution that had sparked the initial uprising in 2011, and together they thwarted the Gulf Initiative and continued to organize rallies and demonstrations until the United Nations-sponsored National Dialogue Conference in 2013. The conference included disenfranchised representatives from the youth movement, the Houthis, and the Southern Movement — all parties that were excluded from the Gulf Initiative.

Saudi sabotage, airstrikes, fail to quench Yemeni determination

Instead of entering the talks inspired by goodwill, and respecting Yemen’s sovereignty and bridging points of view between the various parties, Saudi Arabia further polarized and torpedoed the nearly year-long National Dialogue Conference, which was meant to bring Yemen’s various factions to a consensus on how to address the country’s most pressing issues. The Kingdom attempted to impose a six-region federation of Yemen, a move that was refused by the conference’s other parties, which saw it as a project to break up the country.

Still, Yemeni parties were close to signing a settlement under the auspices of the United Nations when the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia surprised the world by launching Decisive Storm in March 2015. Jamal BenOmar — the former UN envoy to Yemen, who worked with former U.S. president Jimmy Carter on human rights issues — confirmed that a political deal was close before the Saudi airstrikes began.

Chants of independence and patriotism were not the only factor for Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom was driven by concerns that, should new players be empowered, ones with whom Riyadh was not experienced in dealing, the result could lead to unforeseen and uncontrollable developments in Yemen. Hence, the first motives for their fierce war against the country in 2015. This Saudi approach, however, failed to take into consideration how the youth revolution had merged with Ansar Allah and risen to prominence in a form fundamentally different from what the Saudis had previously known.

Like many members of his generation, Radwan took the street in Bab al-Yemen in the capital city of Sana’a on Friday to call for the liberation of areas still under the control of the Saudi Coalition forces — particularly the oil-rich Marib province, which is witnessing an unprecedented mobilization of youth volunteers, tribes and the Yemeni army to liberate it from the Saudis.  Radwan declared, “We are determined to achieve the goals of our revolution, and we believe that victory is closer than ever.”

mintpressnews.com

Antony Blinken, the newly-appointed US top diplomat, has announced a pause in arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates out of apparent concern over American weapons being used in prosecuting the horrendous war in Yemen.

Blinken was confirmed by the Senate for the post of Secretary of State this week. One of his first moves in taking up the post has been to call a halt to arms deals with Saudi Arabia and the UAE which the previous Trump administration had cut.

There’s been growing bipartisan concern in the US Congress that American weaponry has been deployed by the Saudis and Emiratis in their war on Yemen. Trump ignored all appeals to halt arms sales.

That war has resulted in the world’s worst current humanitarian crisis with millions of Yemenis facing starvation amid mounting evidence of atrocities against civilians from Saudi and Emirati air strikes.

The US, along with Britain and France, are implicated in the horror because these countries have supplied warplanes and missiles to the Arab coalition attacking Yemen.

The move by the new administration of President Joe Biden to suspend arms supplies to Saudis and the Emiratis is to be welcomed. But there is nothing to commend here. It is long overdue.

During Senate hearings last week, Antony Blinken vowed to restore America’s international image, which has been tarnished by former President Donald Trump and his bumptious Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The new administration will endeavor to burnish America’s presumed (and grossly overrated) image as a beacon for human rights and rule of law, and lead by the “power of example”.

It’s therefore plausible that Biden and Blinken are motivated not so much by the suffering of Yemen’s people, but rather more by the urgent need to rehabilitate Washington’s reputation.

The involvement of American military in Yemen is completely beyond the pale. There is no credible justification for supplying weapons to enable this genocidal slaughter. Citing allegations of Iranian proxy support for Houthi rebels is as contemptible as it is lacking in credibility. Those allegations have always been a cynical pretext for launching a war of aggression on Yemen, the poorest country in the Arab region, but strategically situated straddling the Red Sea and Indian Ocean.

So stopping the flow of American weapons to the belligerent Saudi and Emirati regimes is hardly a difficult, moral decision. It’s the very least Washington should do to get this horror to stop.

There are other reasons why the Biden administration’s decision on arms transfers over Yemen are hardly commendable.

It was the Obama administration which enabled the Saudi-led war on Yemen beginning in March 2o15. Joe Biden was vice president in that administration and Antony Blinken was the deputy secretary of state. Indeed Blinken was a key supporter of supplying weapons to the Saudis and Emiratis in their unprovoked war of aggression.

Now these same people are posing as wiser, more humane heads by calling off the dogs of war, which they previously unleashed on Yemen.

Here’s another reason to refrain from applauding the Biden administration’s decision to pause arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

During his Senate confirmation hearings, Blinken made it clear that the Biden administration will confer closely with the Israeli state on all its Middle East policies.

One of the big-ticket arms deals cut by the Trump administration was the sale of F-35 stealth fighter jets to the UAE worth around $23 billion. This was part of the quid quo pro of the UAE making its supposed historic peace deal with Israel last year. However, the Israelis let it be known at the time that they objected vehemently to that sale of advanced weaponry.

The F-35s to the UAE are part of the Biden administration’s suspended arms sales.

That prompts suspicion that President Biden and his fervently pro-Israeli top diplomat Tony Blinken are not entirely motivated by suffering in Yemen. They started it and are responsible for the catastrophe nearly six years in the making.

Their bigger concern seems to be damage limitation to America’s bloody image, and also doing a big favor for Israel.

Joe Biden is now the president of the United States of America. His day one executive orders should have prioritized ending the single worst crisis in the world in Yemen, a war he campaigned on ending US involvement in, but they did not.

Ending US participation in the Yemen genocide could and should have begun on day one. In These Times reported the following back in November (emphasis added):

One thing Biden can do, starting on day one, is end U.S. involvement in the Yemen war — involvement that he helped initiate. ​“By executive order, Biden could get the Pentagon to end intelligence sharing for the Saudi coalition airstrikes, end logistical support, and end spare parts transfers that keep Saudi warplanes in the air,” Hassan El-Tayyab, lead Middle East policy lobbyist for the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a progressive organization, tells In These Times. ​“He could restore humanitarian assistance to northern Yemen. He could use his power as president to put pressure on other nations that are supporting the Saudi coalition — like France, the United Kingdom and Canada — and get them to follow suit. He could have the State Department put a stop on all arms sales to Saudi Arabia unless they meet certain benchmarks.”

Biden did none of these things, which while unsurprising is still inexcusable. This isn’t some ten-year infrastructure plan we’re talking about, this is the worst mass atrocity on our entire planet and it should be treated with proportionate urgency. This administration consciously chose not to end US participation in that atrocity as swiftly as possible, which will remain an inexcusable decision even if the Yemen war is eventually ended later.

Instead of grilling Biden about his decision not to prioritize his promise to end the Yemen war, which is what any real journalist would do, the press are asking him stupid nonsense questions about whether he can “unite the country”.

CNN keeps screaming at Biden “can you unite the country” and he keeps ignoring them. Hilariously dumb question, even funnier reaction.

— Secular Talk (@KyleKulinski) January 20, 2021

In the lead-up to Biden’s inauguration we were treated to some Senate hearings on his cabinet picks, in which we learned that this administration will continue Trump’s murderous coupmongering in Venezuela, that it will maintain Trump’s incendiary decision to have the US embassy in Jerusalem, that reviving the Iran nuclear deal is a long ways off from happening and will first require consultation with Israel, and that it will be continuing Trump’s cold war escalations against China.

In one of the more bizarre displays in the Senate hearings, Biden’s nominee to lead the State Department Tony Blinken defended his support for the disastrous Libya intervention during his time in the Obama administration by blaming its aftermath on Muammar Gaddafi, the leader who was mutilated to death in the streets after a US-led intervention to oust him.

“Here’s what I think we misjudged,” Blinken said. “We didn’t fully appreciate the fact that one of the things Gaddafi had done over the years was to make sure that there was no possible rival to his power, and as a result there was no effective bureaucracy, no effective administration in Libya with which to work when he was gone.”

By “when he was gone” Blinken means when he was dead, because the United States helped kill him after staging an intervention based on lies. He is defending his push for an intervention which led to a failed state where people are sold as slaves by saying that if Gaddafi had run his country better it would not have collapsed into violence and chaos when the Obama administration murdered him.

This is like an axe murderer blaming his actions on his victim’s bad housekeeping. The brazenness with which imperialist goons can shrug off all responsibility for their actions will never cease to astonish.

At Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State nominee Anthony Blinken defends support for war in Libya

“In fact, I think it’s been written about. I was [Biden’s] national security adviser, and he didn’t agree with that course of action.” pic.twitter.com/ZyCzTLXtOP

— Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) January 19, 2021

The next two years will be the Democratic Party at its most transparent. After two years they are statistically likely to lose control of the House and/or Senate, after which time they’ll be able to pawn off all imperialist bloodshed and lack of progress on an “obstructionist congress” like they did for the last six years of the Obama administration. But until then the Democrats are going to have to own all of their reactionary depravity and mass murder on their own.

This will set a sharp contrast from the past four years, where every mundane part of the US empire’s institutionalized abuse was portrayed as an anomaly unique to the Trump administration. Unable to blame their refusal to advance progressive policies and basic human decency on Trump and Vladimir Putin these next two years, they’ll be forced to kill any leftward movement all on their own. Which is why we are now already seeing mass media articles with headlines like “Under Biden, it’s time for Democrats to let go of Medicare for All”.

And this period will provide ample opportunities to highlight the fact that that’s exactly what the Democratic Party exists to do: kill all leftward movement in the most powerful government on earth. As the US continues its soul-crushing neoliberal policies at home and its murderous neoconservative policies abroad with the same degree of psychopathy it displayed in previous administrations, we must draw attention to the fact that it is the Democratic Party which bears responsibility for these things.

The sooner Americans can discredit the Democratic Party as a legitimate vehicle for progressive change, the sooner they can start looking for other tools. The first step to escape is to stop pushing against the fake door falsely labeled “exit”.

caityjohnstone.medium.com