Alwaght- Activities of Yemeni Ansarullah forces, subsequent to political and security developments, have made the Conservatives of Saudi Arabia to lose their temper after a long time, and adopt strict regional policies. Although some analysts believe the Saudi-led aggression against Yemen is rooted in Saudis’ desire to revenge themselves on Iran, and the last attempts of the Saudi king to preserve his throne, but at another level it can be regarded as a sign of loyalty of Abdul Aziz’s sons to the realistic approach of power in the new world. Nevertheless, the inefficiencies of this theory, have created them some problems and have also made them susceptible to some issues. The Saudi-led aggression against Yemen began with the green light of the US in the framework of the Arabic and regional coalition, whereas no one can deny the collaboration between the anti-Yemeni coalition and the US logistical and intelligence support to them .
Why did Saudi Arabia attack Yemen ?
The Saudi-led aggression against Yemen began on March 26 , 2015 with the leading role of Saudi Arabia and with the participation of Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Qatar, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates. Besides, the members of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council alleged the attacks were launched in response to a request from Yemen’s former president, Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi. The Saudis also believe that due to their common border with Yemen, recent developments and domestic unrest in Yemen have inflicted some losses on the country, so the Saudis government believe they have the required legitimacy for intervention to restore stability and order in the country and make attempts to bring back Mansour Hadi to power. In fact, this argument of Saudis is nothing but an old justification in order to maintain hegemony through crime and massacre. This intervention, at another level, is the continuation of a procedure that the US pursues in its plan for the fight against terrorism and weapons of mass destruction in the region. In brief, it is going to strengthen the international anarchy and serious violation of human rights. It is obvious that with this action of the Saudi Arabia, the violation of international laws and the Charter of the United Nations as an international commitment have now become normalized in the region .
This war, once again disclosed the double standards of the US as the most important foreign actorthe developments in the world of Islam; however, it has shown that the geostrategic interests of Saudi Arabia and the countries supporting it, simply disregard any kind of international laws or concerns over the life of people in several countries .
Reflection on violations of international laws in Yemen war
The civilization of international relations emerged with the advent of important international and regional organizations responsible for the commitment of states to their domestic and foreign obligations. What the West Asian countries have faced over the past year has been the strengthening of excessive violence and reproduction of new order in the form of a growing disorder. The aggression against Yemen not only changed the organized order of the region, and provided the opportunities for expansion of terrorist groups such as ISIS to pursue their territorial interests, but also it has provided new opportunities for expansionist policies for regional players such as Turkey, and eventually it has helped to normalize some forms of modern violence. On the other hand, at the international level, it has become a pretext to legitimize this type of action by other actors .
We may conclude that Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia has posed a threat to international peace and security. In this regard, their claims about ensuring security and stability in Yemen, and their intervention procedures at the outset, are instances of violation of many provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. Regardless of whether one can regard Mansour Hadi as the legal president of Yemen, Saudi Arabia’s initial resort to violence and advocacy groups have targeted the sovereignty of Yemen and in doing so, have violated the principle of equality of countries as an irreversible rule in international relations. Nevertheless, as these countries have disregarded diplomatic solutions and support, this calls into question the goodwill of the countries in the pursuit of international peace and security. On the other hand, according to paragraph 3 of Article 2 of the UN Charter, UN members are required to resolve their differences by peaceful means. Besides, according to next paragraph of the UN Charter, the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of countries is prohibited except where permitted by the Security Council. According to Article 24 of the UN Charter, the primary responsibility for maintenance of peace and security threats in the early stages, except for self-defense is granted to the Security Council and if the Council recognizes the difference as a threat to international peace and security, in the initial stages under the Chapter VI of the Charter, recommends some measures; when the threat to the peace is ensured, the conditions will be provided for taking measures under Chapter VII. It should be noted that when the Saudis invaded Yemen, the council even did not discuss it under the provisions of the Articles 41 and 42 , so that the actions of the coalition could be regarded as the request of the council from a regional entity for preserving the stability and security. The problem is that the Saudi-led coalition was formed, without Security Council authorization and without regard to the legal mechanisms; however, the intentions and political goals to change the balance of power in the region against the relations between Iran and the West, and the Shiite and Wahhabi-Salafi movements are quite obvious .
Some researchers contend that the conflict in Yemen is not of international type. They believe in an international conflict, at least two states struggle against each other, while in Yemen, no government can properly be identified. Accordingly, the members of the coalition along with supporters of Yemen against the Ansarullah comprise two contending sides of an internal struggle. It is worth mentioning that in both cases, in accordance with the rules of the Geneva Convention and its Second Additional Protocol, the parties to any dispute are responsible for the rights of citizens, individuals and civilian targets. The parties respect for the rights of conflicts is not relevant to the reciprocal actions. Apart from international humanitarian law which protects the citizens, civilians and non-military targets against the damage caused by war, it is mandatory to respect human rights even in time of war. Yemen and other countries involved, are regarded as members of human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and violent behavior. While Yemenis not only have experienced cluster bombs, but some sources reported that up to 5,500 were killed and some 20000 were wounded during the attacks. Displacement, as the primary consequence of any war, has affected 1.2 million Yemenis. Imposing total blockade against Yemen and targeting the non-military objects, the destruction of cultural and historical monuments in the country and airstrikes that sometimes reached up to 40 attacks a day, apart from ignoring the relevance and importance of the parties in conflict, revealed the inefficiency of international structures in containing violence and aggression in the international scene. It has also increased poverty, insecurity and instability through destruction of the country’s identity, a problem that in the long-term and the medium term has reversed the superstructure security of Saudis. Nevertheless, it should be a warning to other regional powers such as Iran, Turkey and even Russia to have a broader perspective of the regional developments, and reasonably estimate the profit or loss of strengthening the chaos or establishing peace and progress in the region .