Yemen Adrift: The Houthi Takeover and its Consequences for the Middle East

Three experts discussed the current Yemini crisis and the future of the country following former President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi’s resignation.

On January 30, the Middle East Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center hosted an event, “Yemen Adrift: The Houthi Takeover and its Consequences for the Middle East.” The center welcomed Peter Salisbury, journalist based in Yemen for Reuters, Al Jazeera, and Foreign Policy, Muhammad al Basha, spokesman at the Embassy of the Republic of Yemen in Washington, D.C., and Charles Schmitz, Professor of Geography at Towson University and an affiliated scholar for the Middle East Institute. Robert Worth, Woodrow Wilson Center Public Policy scholar, moderated the event. Jane Harman, Director, President and CEO, Woodrow Wilson Center, provided opening remarks.

Peter Salisbury opened the discussion by describing how the Houthis arrived at their position of power. Salisbury explained that as a result of the National Dialogue Conference (NDC) various political coalitions emerged who shared the same goals. The coalitions consisted of the Houthis, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh and his party (the General People’s Congress), and tribal groups that have largely been controlled by conservative Islamists and military leaders. He stated that Saleh and his party and the Houthis worked together to ensure that the conservative Islamists would not pose a threat to them in the future, which led the Houthis to take control of Sana’a and secure a strategic bargaining position. However, Salisbury stated that the attack on the Yemini presidential palace caused a division between Saleh loyalists and the Houthis. Salisbury ended by noting that there is now the possibility of a Saleh supporter leading the country, but that the Houthis are also encouraging their own presidential council.

Charles Schmitz emphasized the Houthis’ use of force as a tool for political power. The Houthis began as an oppressed group, but have taken on a more aggressive approach since the 2011 revolution. He argued that the transitional phase of the NDC kept Saleh’s influence present in politics and attempted to unite the Houthis and the southerners. Schmitz stated that the transitional government failed due to underlying power plays occurring. He noted that Iran funded the monetary and military aid needed for the Houthis to gain control in Sana’a. However, Schmitz argued that the Houthis’ most significant mistake was taking control of the north without properly governing it. This Houthis’ use of force ultimately alienated the other groups and kept the Houthis from carrying out proper negotiations. He expressed his concerns over the tribal groups in the eastern region and the possibility of a civil war.

Muhammad al Basha discussed briefly Yemen’s current situation and the possibility of a presidential council forming; however, he argued that there are many obstacles to overcome before this can happen. He stated that the president is still legally in power despite last week’s attack and that this has caused problems among the different coalitions. He states that the 2011 regime began behaving as an oppositional power while there was no governing power, which led to the current crisis. Al Basha argued that there was a sense of mistrust among the different coalitions. He ended his discussion by expressing his fears for the Yemini economy in the future due to the civil unrest.

In the question and answer portion of the event, al Basha stated that without Saudi Arabia, Yemen’s economy would collapse. Schmitz added that there is history between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis and that the Saudis are interested in ensuring security in the region and are open for conversation if the Houthis are willing to negotiate.

By Mirette Wahba