Follow us on social

Bipartisan disgust over US role in Yemen could incite early 2021 action

Bipartisan disgust over US role in Yemen could incite early 2021 action

Democrat and Republican sponsors say they hope Biden will sign a new War Powers Resolution early next year.

Analysis | Middle East

Congress made history last year when the House and the Senate collaborated to adopt a War Powers Resolution for the first time, seeking to remove U.S. Armed Forces from Yemen. With a Republican majority in the Senate and the Democrats dominating the House, the bill required a bipartisan consensus to stay afloat. It passed easily, drawing together figures as ideologically divergent as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.). 

Though President Trump vetoed the measure and the Senate was unable to muster up the supermajority necessary to keep the bill alive, the sentiment behind it clearly hasn’t vanished. Just last month, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D–Ore.) — along with three Republicans (Reps. Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz, and Francis Rooney) and four Democratic cosponsors — introduced a concurrent resolution once again calling for the removal of U.S. Armed Forces from Yemen. 

At this point, the bill has been agreed to in both the House and the Senate. Unfortunately, given the reality of the calendar, the measure may never receive a vote and die at the end of this legislative session. But even so, it represents critical momentum on both sides of the aisle and a growing movement to end the war in Yemen. 

That means there will likely be similar legislation, perhaps in both chambers, early on in the new session. But the likely reception in the Oval Office could not be more different. There, it will meet a president-elect who has sworn that he will end U.S. support for the war in Yemen. After five years of questionable involvement in the Yemeni civil war, the U.S. could finally do its part to put an end to the humanitarian crisis it has helped create. 

Rep. Ro Khanna, (D-Calif.) who helped to spearhead the War Powers Resolution bill that Trump vetoed in this Congress, said he is confident that new legislation will move quickly early next year. "Once it passes both chambers, the president would need to sign it and then Secretary [of State Tony] Blinken can convey to the Saudis that time is up; that they need to end this war and they need to make amends, and they need to pay reparations for the damage they've done," Khanna told Middle East Eye in December.

To call the situation in Yemen urgent would be a gross understatement. As the war rages on, Yemen is teetering on the edge of a famine so catastrophic that “millions of lives may be lost,” according to United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. This is on top of thousands of cholera cases every week, the undetected spread of COVID-19, roughly 3.6 million displaced Yemenis, and nearly 20,000 civilian casualties of war. 

DeFazio’s current resolution cites a number of activities the U.S. has conducted in support of the Saudi-led coalition, including training Saudi pilots, providing spare airplane parts, and sharing combat-related intelligence. These activities, the resolution argues, violate the 1973 War Powers Resolution. 

The U.S. government, for its part, has denied that any of these activities are out of step with the WPR. And Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says, “ending the conflict in Yemen is a national security priority.”

But both of those justifications are dubious. The WPR clearly states in section 8(c) that U.S. Armed Forces may not be involved in hostilities or situations “where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances” without the approval of Congress — and that includes coordinating support. Given that the U.S. has provided war-related logistical, material, and intelligence assistance to the Saudis for years, the laundry list of War Powers Resolution violations is lengthy. 

As for Pompeo’s view that ending the Yemeni civil war is in the national interest, his logic is questionable. The war began as a domestic power struggle, and forecasts by Saudi experts that it would be over in mere weeks have proven shamefully wrong. American politicians and citizens alike see little reason for the U.S. to remain tied to this tragedy. 

Furthermore, many scholars and foreign policy experts argue that without critical U.S. support, Saudi Arabia would likely end the conflict. By continuing to funnel munitions to the Kingdom, and by aiding the Saudis on other fronts — no matter how much we fool ourselves into thinking our engagement is remote — the U.S. is pushing Yemen further from peace. 

There remains the issue of arms sales, of course. Trump has signed a number of lucrative deals with the Saudi government, providing the kingdom weapons that have been implicated in devastating strikes on civilian targets and have landed in the hands of militias fighting American allies. Such deals aren’t explicitly addressed in the recent bill. But this legislation could mark a new era of scrutiny on Riyadh — one that should compel Biden and Congress to cut off weapons sales to the kingdom.

U.S. support for the Saudi-led coalition has kept the war roaring, and at long last, there’s a clear exit in sight. The current resolution is directly in line with the wishes of Congress and the American public. It could put an end to the U.S.’s illegal support for the Saudis, and it could begin to mitigate Yemen’s woes. For the incoming Biden administration, the choice should be clear: It’s time to close this shameful chapter in our foreign policy for good. 

Abdullah al-Khawlani puts roses on the grave of his son, Waleed, who was killed in a Saudi-led air strike that killed dozens including children in Saada, Yemen, in September 4, 2018. REUTERS/Naif Rahma|
Analysis | Middle East
||
Diplomacy Watch: A peace summit without Russia
Diplomacy Watch: Ukraine risks losing the war — and the peace

Diplomacy Watch: How close were Russia and Ukraine to a deal in 2022?

QiOSK

The RAND corporation’s Samuel Charap and Johns Hopkins University professor Sergey Radchenko published a detailed timeline and analysis of the talks between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators just after the Russian invasion in February 2022 that could have brought the war to an end just weeks after it had begun.

Much of the piece confirms or elucidates parts of the narrative that had previously been reported. In the spring of 2022, the two sides appeared relatively close to a deal, one that, according to the authors, would “have ended the war and provided Ukraine with multilateral security guarantees, paving the way to its permanent neutrality and, down the road, its membership in the EU.”

keep readingShow less
Blinken ignores State recommendation to sanction Israeli units: Report
L-R: U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shake hands after their meeting at the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem, on Monday, January 30, 2023. DEBBIE HILL/Pool via REUTERS

Blinken ignores State recommendation to sanction Israeli units: Report

QiOSK

State Department leadership is ignoring a recommendation from an internal panel to stop giving weapons to several Israeli military and police units due to credible allegations of serious human rights abuses, according to a major new report from ProPublica.

The alleged violations, which occurred before the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks, include extrajudicial killings, sexual assault of a detainee, and leaving an elderly Palestinian man to die after handcuffing and gagging him. Secretary of State Antony Blinken received the recommendation in December but has yet to take action to prevent the units involved from receiving American weapons.

keep readingShow less
What will NATO do with its giant Arctic footprint?

US Army Special Forces soldiers assigned to 10th Special Forces Group move out on skis into the Swedish Arctic on 23 February 2022. (NATO)

What will NATO do with its giant Arctic footprint?

Global Crises

As NATO commemorated its 75th anniversary this month, the direction of the alliance’s posture toward the Arctic region has been called into question.

The recent accession of Sweden means that seven of eight of the world’s Arctic nations fall under NATO’s security umbrella, with Russia being the outlier. While some analysts see the addition of Sweden and Finland as an opportunity for NATO to “increase its footprint” and “deter Russia,” the last thing the alliance needs is to scour for another avenue for confrontation with Russia.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest