Trouble in Paradise

An article on Yemen has surfaced among the many articles coming out of the recent US diplomatic cable disclosure. The link to the Times article here

The article focuses on the role of the Yemen president in shaping US and western policy toward the country.

“Referencing the high poverty rate and illicit arms flows into both Yemen and Somalia, Saleh concluded by saying, ‘If you don’t help, this country will become worse than Somalia,’ ” said a September 2009 cable from the American ambassador, Stephen A. Seche, describing Mr. Saleh as being in “vintage form.”

The article goes on to describe how the president uses the potential threat of terrorist strikes on western targets by Al-Qaeda to attract military and development aid. He seems to be playing the role of ally but what else could explain that behavior?

1. Saleh is a survivor. You don't stay in power of the poorest Arab country for 26 years by following the rules and certainly not by practicing democracy. The patronage system that permits him to stay in power is likely fragile and would fracture, causing instability, if the president could no longer supply it.

2. Al Qaeda is more a threat to Yemen than it is to the US. I have not read their mission statement but Al Qaeda in Yemen is more angry at Saudi Arabia and the Yemen government than they are at the US. Attacks on Yemen targets do not receive the same spotlight though thus that element is easily lost. By making AQAP the US's problem, Yemen receives fancy war toys that it can use on whom ever it wants.

3. Of the domestic insurrections facing the president, AQAP is not the most threatening. He has been fighting the Houti rebels along the Saudi Arabian border for the past couple summers and is also dealing with an increasingly rebellious south that threatens succession. Shrewdly, Saleh lumps AQAP and the southern movement into one threat justifying a hard hand in the south. While there is no denying that terrorism is a threat from Yemen and to Yemen, the Yemeni government inflates the threat of terrorism and gives little attention to the more serious threats of water depletion in the capital and the country's addiction to qat. With some probability will terrorism bring down Yemen but with a higher probability will lack of water and economic stagnation bring about trouble.

In terms of attracting foreign aid, it seems the Yemeni government is playing the tune the donors want to hear: terrorism. We must ask though if 'fighting' terrorism in Yemen is the right treatment. I see it as giving aspirin to a patient with a broken arm. You may relive the pain temporarily but the pain will return. Eventually, if the break, the source of the pain, is not addressed, the bone begins to set and even more drastic action is needed to set things right. Now, that example is not perfect. Western governments should not think of themselves as diplomatic doctors with the power to solve developing country issues but to the extent that terrorism is more a symptom of underlying imbalances and grievances than it is the broken bone itself, then the US and others have a responsibility to not continue offering pain killers if that distracts from the necessary course of action.