EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Should the UN nations recognize Houthis authority?

< Return to subforum
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 9 2015 4:46 PM
Thoughts?
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Apr 10 2015 1:22 PM
Blackflag: No. They're just another terrorist group.
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 3:00 PM
Dassault Papillon: How so?
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 3:48 PM
Well I am too impatient to wait for you answer. Our societies ignorance towards other cultures has led us to believe that any Muslim group which fights against the establishment are terrorists. Only two nations in the entire world classify Houthis as terrorists, and it is ironic, because the KSA and UAE do not exactly have a good human rights record. The actual truth is that groups like Hezbollah and Houthis do not commit terrorist acts. Their organizations are built on the foundation of powerful Shiite tribes, but their purpose if purely political. Houthis does not raze villages. Houthis does not use its heavy weapons to bombard cities. Houthis does not torture people of opposite religious schools and commit extra-judicial executions on citizens of suspicion.

Know who did do all these things? The former Yemeni government in their GCC backed campaign in Sa'dah. Houthis has been fighting a downhill civil war since 2004, a conflict which in a decade killed a little over 2000 civilians, and displaced over a hundred thousand. Those deaths were not a result of beheadings and other heinous acts of terror, but rather the explicit consequences of a brutal and unforgiving war.

Now, after 11 years of terrible civil war, in a nation with more poverty and sexual slavery than any other in the Middle east, Yemen finally has a new government. This new government, which now controls the three major and strategic cities of Yemen, is left unchallenged by any internal faction in Yemen whom has a realistic chance of victory. This is because Houthis's victory was secured on the promises of overturning the corruption and neglect the previous government had became notorious for. Houthis's victory was secured with the support of the people.

This is not new news. Houthis had long been the most powerful and influential voice in Yemen. Unlike most other groups in the Middle East, Houthis has both Shiites and Sunni among its ranks. Houthis is not a terror group. It is a revolutionary group. Since it is abundantly clear that Houthis is not a terrorist organization, let us move on to why the UN should recognize their authority.

Yemen, as I pointed out earlier, has finally seen a victor in an eleven year civil war. The old governments only chance at restoring legitimacy is with military support from other nations, such as the Gulf Cooperation Council. Hadi has offensive capabilities, and since last week, Hadi only controls a fifth of their new provisional capital Aden. Almost all the loyalists have already evacuated the city, because they know failure is inevitable. The Houthis seizure of Atag and AQAP's takeover of Mullah leaves the government with a few minor towns of no strategic importance.

Some, like you, would see this as a bad thing. This is actually good thing. No more war. A restored government. After a decade of war, the tired people of Yemen can finally strive for three decades of peace. Oh wait, they cant. Do you know why? Their new government who obtained power with civil support, is now at war with several foreign powers who have no right getting involved, and that is clear, because their jump to war shows that they have no interests in the welfare of the distressed Yemeni people. 700 human beings died in a week of Saudi airstrikes (only 150 of which were combatants!) In that time, dozens of anti-intervention rallies formed throughout Yemen's major cities. Houthis are not the bad guys. The bad guys are those butchering dozens of human beings each day with American bombs.

Houthis was in the middle of ongoing negotiations for heavens sake. It took less than a week of negotiating for Malik and his brother to agree to form a democratic government and guarantee the amnesty of opposition fighters. It took nearly a century for Iran to agree to a democratic government. That is a sign of good faith, and an open hand at establishing friendly relations. If the international community decides to recognize Houthis and condemn the intervention of the real terrorist state, Saudi Arabia, then we might have an ally and not another enemy in the Middle East.

@admin - weigh in
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 3:53 PM
Sorry for the wall there, but I feel strongly about this one.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Apr 10 2015 5:33 PM
Blackflag: I'm about to go to bed and I'm not going to bother reading all this (or at least not tonight), but the Houthis have expressed hatred of the United States and Israel (I think). As the United States really isn't the Sith Empire that virtually every liberal out there makes it out to be, groups that express such sentiment typically are terrorist in nature. I'm not necessarily saying that the former Government of Yemen is any better than them, but it's basically the equivalent of Saddam Hussein's regime being toppled by the ISIL. He was bad, but his replacement (in this scenario) is hardly an improvement.
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 6:05 PM
As the United States really isn't the Sith Empire that virtually every liberal out there makes it out to be, groups that express such sentiment typically are terrorist in nature.
Groups which do not like the United States are terrorists. I am not into semantics, but you really need to recheck that dictionary man..
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 6:33 PM
I'm not necessarily saying that the former Government of Yemen is any better than them, but it's basically the equivalent of Saddam Hussein's regime being toppled by the ISIL. He was bad, but his replacement (in this scenario) is hardly an improvement.
It is basically the equivalent of a false equivalent.

Compare and contrast
?1
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 10 2015 6:34 PM
Sure, Houthis hates America and Israel. Can you name an Arab country which doesn't?
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Apr 16 2015 3:16 PM
After being forced to research the Houthi and the circumstances of their rise to power, my personal conclusion was that I support their right to exist. I certainly understand their desire for autonomy, (in whatever form that may take, including control of Yemen as a whole) and I sympathise with the geo-political situation they find themselves in.

I agree with your conclusion that they are not a Terrorist organisation, and I especially agree that liking America or not is not the defining factor on whether you are classed as a terrorist or not!

After my research, my fairly strong conclusion was that while I sympathise with their frustration, I don't think that taking control of Yemen the way they did was right. After evicting the previous Kleptocracy, (which absolutely is what it was) they should have given the new government a chance to correct things.

Would it have worked? Probably not, but it doesn't matter, I think it would have been the better thing to do.
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Apr 16 2015 3:21 PM
That being said, I feel VERY strongly that the world might work better if outside governments didn't concern themselves with affairs in other countries. I realise that this might mean greater inequality and attrocities in certain countries, but I think it might work better than our current system.

I think of it as the equivalent of letting two kids punch it out instead of forcing them to play nice.

It's a line I considered running as my sole contention in the debate against @Admin ... I'd be interested to hear if he thought that might have been a better option than the one I took?
admin
By admin | Apr 16 2015 3:24 PM
nzlockie: Honestly that would have been interesting. Would have thrown me a bit I think.
I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Apr 16 2015 3:44 PM
admin: Yeah. I hadn't thought it all the way through, but I was planning on referencing basic "survival of the fittest" type philosphies to show that it might have merit.

I identified that letting a country implode and destroy itself would be a possible side effect, and I was ok with that, but I thought that should that destruction end up affecting the rest of the world - such as nuclear war; that might be a bigger problem. It was around that time I decided I didn't have enough time or energy to do that attack justice, so I went a more boring way.

Next time...
Thumbs up from:
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 17 2015 8:16 AM
After my research, my fairly strong conclusion was that while I sympathise with their frustration, I don't think that taking control of Yemen the way they did was right.
Neither do I, and I bring this up everytime I get into a debate on the subject. Houthis ousted the former government, and the war killed a lot of people. Countries would be in a stronger position if they stand united rather than opposed, no matter what kind of government they may have. Over time, if allowed and aided by the rest of the world, countries will begin to prosper and public opinion towards becoming a free democratic nation will naturally shift in favor over time.

The problem, like I told Gendo, is that Houthis already has their hands on the government and every major industrial and strategic city in Yemen.


The civil war is over, and just like it was wrong for Houthis to wage war on the government, it would also be wrong for the former government to wage a war on Houthis. The intervention of the GCC makes matters even worst. Hasn't Yemen seen enough war? Does Saudi Arabia and the rest of the world really need to bring about another one on the country?

Blackflag
By Blackflag | Apr 17 2015 8:43 AM
Given that it goes along with the topic, I would like to speculate on the upcoming war that will inevitably come about between Yemen and the GCC. I think Houthis has a realistic chance at winning. Having an allied coalition lose against a smaller force would go a long way in making foreign interventions undesirable for a long time, just like what happened in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan.

An invasion of Yemen would likely come in two stages. First a huge offensive through the Saudi Border crossings into Yemen, and then either an amphibious assault on either the port of Aden or Al-Hudaydah. From every logical perspective it seems like Aden would be the most likely place for an invasion, given that it is on the highway to the capital and it is capable of bringing in resources and weapons of war on bulk. Houthis political legitimacy is only secure as long as they control the capital. The moment they lose that they cease to be a government. At the same time the Sa'dah and Sanaa governates are the largest source of manpower. That makes them along with Aden, the three most important cities for the GCC to take during the ground invasion.



The flatter areas of Sa'dah are vulnerable to a Saudi tank rush, and would likely be taken within a week or two. No doubt an insurgency would hold itself up in the mountains and countryside, trying to destroy enemy infrastructure at every opportunity. From a commanders perspective, the Sanaa governate is the absolute worst place to ever be forced to attack. It is extremely elevated and rocky, is home to the most populous towns in the country, and is overwhelmingly Shiite. It would be suicide for any tanks to try to move up the mountains, and they would be utterly ineffective fighting tunnelers and guerrillas, not to mention defending Houthis armor. It would be just as bad for infantrymen. They would have to contend with 10,000's of armed fighters holed up in bunkers and defenses. It is like taking Fort Knox 24 times over. Still, with the massive airforce and armies the GCC have gathered, the winning strategy would surely be surrounding the mountainside and bombing the whole governate to ashes before an infantry offensive. That is with two flaws. If Iran finds a way to resupply the defending Shiites with new weapons and materials, not only would it be easy to recoup losses, but overtime it would become even more defensible, making it a slaughter for the GCC to move forward. The second flaw is that Sanaa's high mountains make it impossible for non-tactical bombers to navigate, and you better believe any plane going higher than 500 feet would be shot down.

To be honest, I think Saudi Arabia is foolish for wanting to dedicate actual ground troops to attacking Yemen. I have some foresight into the future, and I would not be suprised if this is one of the worst military embarrassments in history. I imagine Houthis will hold on to Sanaa with everything they have, and inflict massive casualties on the GCC forces. Eventually the UN will see the evidence of how horrid the war will be and declare a ceasefire, or even better, pass a mandate forcing Saudi Arabia to withdraw. All this is possible only if Houthis controls the capitol, because Saudi Arabia would be all to happy to declare a ceasefire after getting Hadi his palace throne back.