It is not the same to leave the war than to enter it

The war in Yemen is not the same as the “Paris climate deal” from which the Donald Trump administration withdrew, and the Biden administration may return to it after renegotiating it. Indeed, direct U.S. interests there may prevent Biden from fulfilling his electoral promise to end the war by stopping his country’s involvement in it and responding to calls from Congress to ban arms sales to Riyadh. Some believe that the president-elect will rush to follow the negotiating political trends in Yemen, moving away from this complex and contradictory web of interests, which makes it difficult to resolve options. Added to this is the difficulty of the fact that the US administration, whether republican or democratic, is no longer that power that, if it said it did, and if it did, it would have achieved the required results, especially since there are active and active parties. influencers in the region who are an integral part of any negotiation, while the Saudi side will be the least influential. Despite its occupation of large areas in southern Yemen, due to its lack of management of the occupied areas and the presence of other partners in it. On the other hand, the option of having the United States directly enter the war, or deepen its participation in it, seems impossible to contradict the strategy of ending the wars that the new administration promised to follow.

In this regard, the “American Stratfor Center” for Strategic and Security Studies considered that the window to exit the conflict in Yemen, without exposing all the “achievements” that Saudi Arabia has made, is closing rapidly. The Center expects relations between Riyadh and Washington to be characterized by increased hostility when Biden officially takes office on January 20, as the kingdom will be subject to political pressure from the United States, deepening the trust gap between the two allies. Given that Biden, unlike Trump, will be unwilling to obstruct Congressional attempts to end US support for the war, noting that Trump has used the veto more than once against Congressional decisions. in this context. Rather, the new administration can make a quick decision to reduce its involvement in the conflict and walk away. Saudi Arabia without the logistical and intelligence support that fuels its operations in Yemen. Unlike the Trump administration, which has followed a policy of fueling and investing in the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the Biden administration believes in a different approach based on the negotiations between Tehran and Riyadh on all files in dispute between them, including Yemen. The new administration faces the record of Tehran and Riyadh in the field of human rights, especially after the kingdom promised to make it a “pariah” country for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

The US administration is no longer that power that, if it said it did, and if it did, it achieved the required results.

In any case, everyone realizes that the war in Yemen is quintessentially American, while the circles of the new administration believe that the war has achieved its American goals by “limiting” the threat of “Ansar Allah”, “restricting “the movement in the north and” keep it away “from the international shipping lanes. And on vital and strategic sites (ports, islands and beaches). Consequently, the continuation of the war is no longer beneficial to Washington, which is interested in negotiating (directly or through mediators) with Sana’a to find an agreement that avoids the continued threat of these interests. Here, the separation will occur between the American and Saudi sides, because no agreement will be ideal for the Kingdom that considers the control of “Ansar Allah” over the north “an existential threat” and a repetition of the experience of “Hezbollah” in its southern borders, plus you are interested in finding a negotiated solution that saves water. Her face does not show her defeated.
However, the problem with all the above is that there is no real lever, be it North American or regional, that forces Sanaa or convinces her (ally or enemy) to make concessions without profit, mainly because she is not interested in ending the war. at any price and without meeting national demands. In proportion to the ability to translate the new facts in the field, in the transition of the army and the “popular committees” to an advanced stage in the initiative and the attack, a transition during which the Yemenis made great sacrifices of blood and property. Sacrifices that seem to escalate the objectives of independence, sovereignty, free decision-making and an irreversible exit from hegemony. Therefore, it is natural for Sana’a to seek to extract its legitimate demands, whether through negotiations or the continuation of the war, and anything else would mean surrender. This was not proposed in the past and will not be in the future, regardless of the sacrifices, to be sure that the cost of domination and guardianship over the past decades is far greater than the cost of continuing the war.

Subscribe to «News» on YouTube here