J. Scott Carpenter, founder of Fikra Forum, participated in a discussion on an episode of Al-Hurra’s “All Directions” on June 4th, as the director of The Washington Institute’s Project Fikra. He addressed Yemen’s future, U.S. interests throughout these events, and Russia’s role in the conflict. The following are excerpts of his comments on these topics.
Commenting on the latest events, Mr. Carpenter said, “It appears to me that Ali Abdul Saleh has bit off more than he can chew. He decided to escalate the conflict, and, through his decisions, distanced himself from the Gulf Cooperation Council’s agreement – and the violence began. So if there was a direct attack on a mosque that he was known to be in, it is clear that heavy army artillery under military leadership must have been used. This has happened before in Yemen. When there is a tribal conflict in Yemen, there will be an inescapable whirlwind, and as a last resort you try to save or preserve your power. The people around Saleh have abandoned him, and his own family is reticent to stand by him. There are divisions within the family and there are two major tribes against him. It appears inevitable to ask the question, ‘What will happen after Saleh?’ If he has been injured and was not killed, there are several scenarios that could happen. But, if he was killed, and many people around him were killed, things will be much more dangerous. But we’ll see…”
In a deeper and more detailed analysis, he added, “We must realize that Saleh was trying to change the message in Yemen. There was a popular uprising whose goal was to remove Saleh from power, so he tried to use al-Qaeda as an excuse. When this failed, he took a gamble by pushing toward an internal conflict between the Hashed Federation and Bakil in the north. A gap was created because some of the best forces under his son’s leadership returned to Sana’a, which allowed him to do what he did. You don’t see southern Yemen exploiting this as an opportunity for secession. The topic on secession is hot right now in the north, but I don’t think that it will lead to an inevitable collapse or fracture of the state. The conflict is due to the state’s long-term weakness and the challenges that faced President Saleh and his regime. I believe that there is still an opportunity for a political solution, although it requires Saleh to step down. If his family or his tribe stand in his way or if there are further deaths, then those are important indicators that all has been lost in Yemen.”
Mr. Carpenter spoke more about Yemen’s internal politics and economy, saying, “No one rules Yemen. I’m not saying that Saleh has done a fantastic job in ruling Yemen, but a part of the issue has to do with the lack of real decentralization. The country is extremely divided, but the efforts of the central government in Sana’a to maintain control over all of Yemen’s resources is crippling. There is a lack of response to the people’s needs at a local level and to the complaints in the south. All of these things would improve once Saleh leaves the scene, however, I don’t believe we should fall into the trap of saying that after Saleh comes a flood. For fifteen years, the flood had censured Yemen from bad governance and bad administration. If it wasn’t for the Saudi money, which flowed to Saleh and allowed him to pit one tribe against another, and the south’s oil money, there wouldn’t be a mechanism. I believe that an open, democratic process with more intelligent dialogue and equality of resources in the country is important, but we need to be careful not to fool ourselves. This is a country that was on the verge of collapse for a long time, whether Saleh leaves the scene or not. There are many ways that things could get worse in Yemen, but preserving Saleh as president is illogical to me.”
Next, Mr. Carpenter was asked about American interests in Yemen. He answered, “Of course the United States is nervous about the issue of who will control or rule Yemen, as a result of the way that we look at Yemen. I’m not saying this is right, but our view of Yemen is based on fighting terrorism. We’re saying, “…al-Qaeda is going to have a failed state in which it can build another base to attack us.” So, a government that is able to ensure that this won’t happen is important to the United States. This being the only perspective from which we look at Yemen, we don’t care as much about a civil war; we’re only nervous about the issue of al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula, which is wrong. So, who will President Obama send to the region to discuss Yemen? John Brennan, an expert on counterterrorism in the United States, to talk to the Saudis and discuss what’s happening in Yemen. Yemen has socio-economic problems with multiple faces, and it requires diplomacy from the State Department, the European Union, and the United Nations Security Council, to think of ways to solve the issue in a peaceful way. If this doesn’t happen, then I’m afraid and I’m sure, that people in the White House will say, ‘Who can we talk to after Saleh, if he is assassinated?’ We care, but we care for the wrong reasons.”
Finally, Mr. Carpenter commented on Russian influence in the Yemeni crisis. He said, “I believe that the Russians were contradictory on the issue of launching NATO’s operations in Libya based on the Security Council’s decision. Medvedev switched his position and tried to exert influence in a region where Russia hasn’t had any influence since the Cold War; and he did so in a way that threw sand in the gears of what NATO and its allies were trying to do. This isn’t the first time that we have seen a breakdown in Russia’s role, whether it is in the political issue in Syria or the topic of Hamas. Even when they were a member of the Quartet, there were statements issued with regards to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and Russia still welcomed Hamas and Meshal in Moscow. This is all part of Russia’s efforts to maintain a link with the region because they feel that there are efforts to isolate them. The last point I would like to make is that much of Europe’s energy comes from Libya, especially in Italy, and most of Europe gets its supplies from Russian energy. Maybe there is a specific angle for oil and energy.”
Watch the full episode here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtTV10IHVs4&feature=relmfu.
J. Scott Carpenter is former director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy's Project Fikra, a program that focuses on empowering Arab democrats in their struggle against extremism. Before The Washington Institute, Scott served in various positions in the U.S. Department of State, including deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and coordinator for the State Department’s Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiatives.
Commenting on the latest events, Mr. Carpenter said, “It appears to me that Ali Abdul Saleh has bit off more than he can chew. He decided to escalate the conflict, and, through his decisions, distanced himself from the Gulf Cooperation Council’s agreement – and the violence began. So if there was a direct attack on a mosque that he was known to be in, it is clear that heavy army artillery under military leadership must have been used. This has happened before in Yemen. When there is a tribal conflict in Yemen, there will be an inescapable whirlwind, and as a last resort you try to save or preserve your power. The people around Saleh have abandoned him, and his own family is reticent to stand by him. There are divisions within the family and there are two major tribes against him. It appears inevitable to ask the question, ‘What will happen after Saleh?’ If he has been injured and was not killed, there are several scenarios that could happen. But, if he was killed, and many people around him were killed, things will be much more dangerous. But we’ll see…”
In a deeper and more detailed analysis, he added, “We must realize that Saleh was trying to change the message in Yemen. There was a popular uprising whose goal was to remove Saleh from power, so he tried to use al-Qaeda as an excuse. When this failed, he took a gamble by pushing toward an internal conflict between the Hashed Federation and Bakil in the north. A gap was created because some of the best forces under his son’s leadership returned to Sana’a, which allowed him to do what he did. You don’t see southern Yemen exploiting this as an opportunity for secession. The topic on secession is hot right now in the north, but I don’t think that it will lead to an inevitable collapse or fracture of the state. The conflict is due to the state’s long-term weakness and the challenges that faced President Saleh and his regime. I believe that there is still an opportunity for a political solution, although it requires Saleh to step down. If his family or his tribe stand in his way or if there are further deaths, then those are important indicators that all has been lost in Yemen.”
Mr. Carpenter spoke more about Yemen’s internal politics and economy, saying, “No one rules Yemen. I’m not saying that Saleh has done a fantastic job in ruling Yemen, but a part of the issue has to do with the lack of real decentralization. The country is extremely divided, but the efforts of the central government in Sana’a to maintain control over all of Yemen’s resources is crippling. There is a lack of response to the people’s needs at a local level and to the complaints in the south. All of these things would improve once Saleh leaves the scene, however, I don’t believe we should fall into the trap of saying that after Saleh comes a flood. For fifteen years, the flood had censured Yemen from bad governance and bad administration. If it wasn’t for the Saudi money, which flowed to Saleh and allowed him to pit one tribe against another, and the south’s oil money, there wouldn’t be a mechanism. I believe that an open, democratic process with more intelligent dialogue and equality of resources in the country is important, but we need to be careful not to fool ourselves. This is a country that was on the verge of collapse for a long time, whether Saleh leaves the scene or not. There are many ways that things could get worse in Yemen, but preserving Saleh as president is illogical to me.”
Next, Mr. Carpenter was asked about American interests in Yemen. He answered, “Of course the United States is nervous about the issue of who will control or rule Yemen, as a result of the way that we look at Yemen. I’m not saying this is right, but our view of Yemen is based on fighting terrorism. We’re saying, “…al-Qaeda is going to have a failed state in which it can build another base to attack us.” So, a government that is able to ensure that this won’t happen is important to the United States. This being the only perspective from which we look at Yemen, we don’t care as much about a civil war; we’re only nervous about the issue of al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula, which is wrong. So, who will President Obama send to the region to discuss Yemen? John Brennan, an expert on counterterrorism in the United States, to talk to the Saudis and discuss what’s happening in Yemen. Yemen has socio-economic problems with multiple faces, and it requires diplomacy from the State Department, the European Union, and the United Nations Security Council, to think of ways to solve the issue in a peaceful way. If this doesn’t happen, then I’m afraid and I’m sure, that people in the White House will say, ‘Who can we talk to after Saleh, if he is assassinated?’ We care, but we care for the wrong reasons.”
Finally, Mr. Carpenter commented on Russian influence in the Yemeni crisis. He said, “I believe that the Russians were contradictory on the issue of launching NATO’s operations in Libya based on the Security Council’s decision. Medvedev switched his position and tried to exert influence in a region where Russia hasn’t had any influence since the Cold War; and he did so in a way that threw sand in the gears of what NATO and its allies were trying to do. This isn’t the first time that we have seen a breakdown in Russia’s role, whether it is in the political issue in Syria or the topic of Hamas. Even when they were a member of the Quartet, there were statements issued with regards to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and Russia still welcomed Hamas and Meshal in Moscow. This is all part of Russia’s efforts to maintain a link with the region because they feel that there are efforts to isolate them. The last point I would like to make is that much of Europe’s energy comes from Libya, especially in Italy, and most of Europe gets its supplies from Russian energy. Maybe there is a specific angle for oil and energy.”
Watch the full episode here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtTV10IHVs4&feature=relmfu.
J. Scott Carpenter is former director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy's Project Fikra, a program that focuses on empowering Arab democrats in their struggle against extremism. Before The Washington Institute, Scott served in various positions in the U.S. Department of State, including deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and coordinator for the State Department’s Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiatives.
on this article