All these are the “small results” of water shortage and possible solutions to them. But we should not forget the most dangerous possibility that is a “war for water” possibility. We saw some examples not as a war but as diplomatic disputes in recent years. The problems between Turkey-Syria-Iraq and Egypt-Sudan exemplify these disputes.

Doing a full-scale irrigation or building full-scale dams on a river, which is being used by more than one countries, result in increase of one of the countries’ prosperity and living standards but result in decrease of the another countries’ ecologic and economic standards. Moreover, the usage of water resources in high rates by up-stream riparian country results in shortage in the rate of potable water and irrigation water and even in drought in down-stream riparian countries. Also, building of dams and barrages by the countries in the places, where the water enters their lands may cause in spates and flooding in the lands of riparian and neighbor countries.

All these problems and possibilities inspire countries, which have water shortage or have possible problems to meet in the same point: to get on well together and to accord. If a possible war is the result, which is not wanted, communion and sharing are the only choices. The relations between states and condition in the region are pregnancy to a war. To decrease the disputes and to achieve the regional peace should be the main aim of the states.

Nail ELHAN

Thus, there is nothing new in the fact that Yemen is an ideological outpost of so-called radical Islamism. Why, then, there is such a surge of emotion towards Yemen?

It is very simple. The vertical power in Yemen dramatically weakened in recent times. Now, the government is unable to effectively maintain a power balance on Islamists, as it previously did. Now it already became barely legal to send militants to Iraq. Moreover, the previous mechanism by which mullahs and shaikhs were successfully “fed up” was ceased to work. Finally, after the death of “spiritual father” of Yemeni Moslems, Sheikh Ahmar, who is the founder of Islamist Islah Party, there began schism in the party(between the moderate and radical thinkers). The economic situation, which was already poor in the region, has deteriorated, which contributed financial crisis and decrease in oil prices. In the meantime, there is a revival of southern Yemeni separatists and Zaydis(strong Shia community in Yemen)

In addition, no one can deny that events in Afghanistan and Iraq contributed to recruitment of a large number of volunteer Yemeni fighters who were following the path of “being shahid”. However, it seems there emerged “brand new community” consisted of escapees of those volunteers who were previously following the path of “shahid”. Now, they also demand their “share of a cake”. I believe that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq themselves have become the new stimulator in the revival of old radical Islamists and radicalizing the young population in the country. In such circumstances, Yemen shows resemblances with Morocco for being one of the main cores for recruitment of “infantry militants”.

It is obvious that Yemen’s army is not in a condition(neither physically nor mentally) to contain and control the situation in the country. So Washington started to feel that the case is gradually becoming to be one more “Talibanistan” for the U.S.. Question rises as whether Yemen is the next to get “democracy” from the U.S. army. Nevertheless, for President Barack Obama, war in Yemen, is, at least, an undesirable situation.

For the time being, it seems that the White House and State Department themselves do not know what to do. Hence, “the U.S. military launched cruise missiles … against two suspected al-Qaeda sites in Yemen”, as ABC news reported. The U.S. and Britain were first among many countries that closed their embassies in Yemen.

January 28, in Britain, a faithful ally of the U.S., Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called for an international meeting to discuss how to confront Al-Qaeda and overall radicalization in Yemen, and this event, in my opinion, again is the evidence of confusion and lack of a clear strategy for the Yemeni question of Washington. Although it is too early to consider this event as complete complication, as far as I observed, it is not going to draw a new strategy neither for the U.S. nor Britain.

For now, what is clear is that the U.S. will not send troops to Yemen, firstly, due to lack of them, indeed. Washington, obviously, feared the reaction of the Yemen, even in the hypothetical possibility of such a step. Identified as Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the U.S. Treasury department, Al-Zindani, head of the al-Islah political movement in Yemen, loudly declared that in the case of the U.S. intervention, jihad will be initiated. I think Washington agrees with him in this regard. After all, subject country is Yemen where weapons of any modifications can be purchased at city markets like tomatoes. By taking these facts into account, one can feel a smell of a guerilla war, which poses a real threat by transferring instability to its neighbour, Saudi Arabia, where the position of immigrants from Yemen is economically strong.

Considering the “transparency” of the Saudi-Yemeni border, which is proved to be “transparent” in Saudi Army’s fighting against Yemeni Zaydis-the Houthis in 2004, this possible guerilla war would not be easy for the U.S. to deal with.  By the way, as spokesman of Somalian terrorist group of al-Shabab(which is considered to have close links with Al-Qaeda) told the BBC, they(Al-Shabab) are successfully exchanging militants and weapons with their Yemeni “brothers”.

Conclusion of beginning

For now, it seems the Yemeni problem of Washington is quite unexpected both for the U.S. and the world. Nevertheless, the Washington is “guilty” for the circumstances: it did not change Saleh when it was possible, maybe hoping “he could handle it”. “He could not”…

Jamil Islamov