The Components of American Strategy

The United States is one of the factors whose role in the political outcomes of recent developments in the Arab world has been decisive. As Richard Walker, writer and analyst of the weekly magazine “American Free Press” points out, the American forces are one of the most important political players in Yemen today. Under the pretext of fighting al-Qaeda and terrorists, Americans are suppressing the Shi’ah movement, fueling the religious divisions among Muslims and fostering extremism among al-Qaeda members in Yemen. However, Yemen is a strategic country by which the United States can have access to Asia and the Middle East; moreover, Yemen could help the American to support its key allies in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and the Zionist regime in their measures against countries like Iran and Iraq. That is why there is cooperation and common interest for al-Qaeda and the West in Yemen to counter the Shi’ah empowerment in the country.

The Followings are the Components of American Strategy in Yemen:

Political Assignment on Saudi Arabia:

The Obama administration has refused to play a serious role in the Yemeni political process in recent months and has shown minimal mobility in the country; instead, the American has called Saudi Arabia to take a pivotal role in Yemen. There are two reasons for this phenomenon: first, in the view of the American, the Arab states are not the same scale of significance and the United States cannot influence them all. Second, Saudi Arabia is so sensitive to Yemen that it is doing its utmost to maintain the Yemeni political regime and prevent the revolutionary and structural developments in this country. it should be noted that this policy is also favoured by the United States.

Democratic Recommendations and Strategic Considerations:

The United States has not been very serious about making democratic recommendations to Yemen so far. The comparison between the case of Syria and Yemen shows that Washington has used an increasingly sharp tone with respect to Syria, not Yemen. This is due to the strategic considerations of the United States that are different in these two countries. In Yemen, like Bahrain, Washington prefers strategic considerations over democratic trends. With its presence in the Persian Gulf and Gulf countries, the United States could reduce Iran’s healthy regional rivalries and prevent the expansion of its sphere of influence, and in turn, increase the sphere of influence of Iran’s rivals.

Currently constraining Iran by restricting its sphere of influence in the region and portraying this country as a regional destructive power are important goals for the American and Saudi military presence in the region, particularly Yemen, Bahrain, Syria and Iraq. Some analysts even believe that controlling the Bab al-Mandeb Strait is a measure taken to reinforce the traps around Iran and a scenario of a war with this country, considering this as the last step that would be taken by NATO to attack Iran.

Currently, the role of the United States in the Persian Gulf and Yemen is to have a serious presence, play a monopoly role and make an alliance with countries and groups that are in favour of the interests of the West.

The American strategists believe that the country’s interest lies in preventing the emergence of any regional power in the Middle East and North Africa. The American presence in the Persian Gulf and Yemen is considered the most serious change in the strategic environment of the region such that it would change the balance of power against Iran’s favour. Nowadays, the American dependence on Saudi oil has turned into an important military and economic alliance between the two countries. From the American point of view, this implies a commitment that originated from a strategic necessity.

However, as far as the developments in Yemen are concerned, the rise of Islamism and the greater influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, Zaidis, and especially al-Qaeda, have been of great concern to the United States more than anything else. Up until now, the son of Saleh and three of his close relatives were running four main security and counter-terrorism organizations in Yemen. Americans know that if another government comes to power, they will face many problems.

the American Defence Secretary Robert M. Gates said: “We have had a lot of counterterrorism cooperation from President Saleh and Yemeni security services. So, if that government collapses or is replaced by one that is dramatically weaker, then I think we’ll face some additional challenges out of Yemen. There’s no question about it. It’s a real problem.”

It should be noted that the United States now has about 75 Special Forces trainers and support personnel in Yemen, as well as an unspecified number of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives. The Americans in Yemen are working closely with dozens of British special forces and intelligence officers, as well as operatives from Saudi Arabia’s spy agencies.

Anthony H. Cordesman writes about the American policy in Yemen:

“The growing ties between Yemen’s Houthi Shi’ites and Iran poses another threat to both Saudi Arabia and the United States. It potentially could allow Iran to deploy air and naval forces to Yemen and increase its strategic depth while enjoying more freedom in acting against the American and Saudis interests in an attempt to create a balance of power in the region. This threat still seems limited, but it is important to note that Yemen’s territory and islands play a critical role in the security of another global chokepoint at the southeastern end of the Red Sea called the Bab al-Mandab or “Gate of Tears.”

Regional powers are trying to inhibit the developments of Yemen changing the direction of its revolution to serve their interests. Saudi Arabia’s surrender to the Yemeni revolutionaries’ demands would mean accepting the reforms within its country. likewise, acknowledging the necessity of making reforms in Yemen by Saudis requires that they follow the same path regarding their own country.

The United States and Arabs of the Persian Gulf are trying to manage the process of transferring power in Yemen so that the Yemeni army, security agencies and the future government do not pose a threat to their interests. Saudi Arabia and the United States are concerned about the spread of Islamic and democratic movements in Yemen and Bahrain and are afraid of establishing an independent state in the region as they would lose their influence. Likewise, the United States, under the pretext of ensuring global order and security, suppresses any popular struggle and movement in Bahrain, Yemen and Saudi Arabia on the grounds that it undermines global stability and security as well as energy security; in addition, the American continues to advocate maintaining the status quo (survival of the royal and tyrannical Arab systems) in the Persian Gulf and Yemen while impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self–determination. This behaviour is in line with Alfred Mahan’s views. Within the framework of sea power theory, Mahan believes that imperialism could not geographically be stable therefore it either should be expanded or fallen.

In this regard, the United States, which has defined global interests for itself, is trying to effectively use its power far and wide. Also, the American aims at working with other countries or individuals to expand its influence and interests in strategic and sensitive areas of the world, including the Persian Gulf. Yemen is of geopolitical importance since oil, natural gas and other natural resources of the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula have made the region to be a key factor in global equations, especially the energy trade.

The Middle East and North Africa have been subjected to severe shocks such as the social consequences of the Arab revolutions and their subsequent severe tensions, as well as the external shocks, such as financial shocks caused by political and physical instability in the region and the overflow of unrest into neighbouring countries. this has reduced the economic, social and political stability of the countries of the region.

Sectarian and ideological conflicts play an important role in the Middle East and North Africa. Somehow these conflicts have become part of the Islamic awakening and uprisings in the region. In fact, such phenomena while being the continuation of historical events and after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, have caused the Muslim world to fall into two major camps; on the one hand, new countries have been created which are small and weak compared to their neighbours and thus they should lean towards European and American supports. On the other hand, some countries have composed of multi-ethnic populations and they are essentially unstable and weak.

The ambition of Prince Faisal to achieve Greater Saudi Arabia has inspired Arabs to begin the uprisings. In their view, Greater Saudi Arabia extends from Alexandria to Aden and from Jerusalem to Baghdad as was the case in the Middle Ages. Faisal lost Syria as a result of the European agreements, but the sovereignty of Hejaz territory and two Islamic holy cities, Makkah and Madinah were given to the most radical Sunni sect, the Wahhabis and ibn Saud, by whom today’s Saudi Arabia has been created.

Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution