Western strikes are too little, too late

The United States and its European allies have bombed three government sites in Syria targeting chemical weapon facilities. The strikes were a success, claimed UK Prime Minister Theresa May. “Mission accomplished,” said US President Donald Trump. And the Pentagon stated that air strikes have set Syria’s chemical weapons programme years backward. As impressive as it might sound, there is still no reason to celebrate or cheer as no solution is yet in sight for the Syrian imbroglio. The strikes led by the US were supposed to send a message that chemical attacks will not be tolerated. A little over a year ago, in April 2017, the US administration had taken a similar approach and struck Syria after Assad’s regime launched a chemical attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun. More than 80 people were killed due to the chemicals. Photos and videos of little children foaming from their mouths and nostrils haunt the world even today. Heart-wrenching pictures of men and women; young and old; children and infants flood the news feed even now. Nothing has changed, except that it propelled Western nations into action, again.

However, what’s next is the real question. US Secretary of Defence James Mattis has said this was “a one-time shot”. Internationally, multiple attempts have already been made to negotiate an end to hostilities. Yet, no concrete progress has been made. The country has turned into ruins and its people into refugees, hoping against hope to return to their land one day and stake rightful claim on what is left to be called home. The Syrian conflict is a proxy war many times over. Therefore, the level of foreign involvement means that the war will not cease until external actors decide that it should. But who will decide? So far the Assad regime and its allies, mainly Russia and Iran, have had an upper hand at making territorial gains and regaining major parts of the country back from the rebels. The United States has mainly remained a bystander, not taking any moral responsibility. It’s time the US developed a coherent policy and gathered the support of its allies to resolve this crisis. Strikes in isolation won’t go a long way.

Warmongers often lose their values and meanings before losing their humanity. One of the manifestations of losing humanity is indifference to the fate of other human beings. Since my appointment as head of government delegation for talks with insurgents, I was keen to make the issue of detainees, abductees and the forcibly disappeared the main issue to reach a political solution and leads to the cessation of war.

I believed that if we could reach an agreement on this issue, we would help those who started the war, Houthis, to restore their humanity. If they regain their humanity, they can facilitate a political agreement and end the war.

Families of thousands of detainees, whose whereabouts are not known, are in pain, namely those of the four leaders: Mahmoud Al Subaihi, Nasser Mansour Hadi, Faisal Rajab, and Mohammed Qahtan, who were kidnapped three years ago. As head of the government’s delegation, I worked with my colleagues to make this issue a top priority. We were able to put it on the top of the agenda before we headed to the Biel talks on December 15, 2015.

We were hoping to alleviate the pain of the victims and their families and find a quick solution. However, we did not believe that the criminals would continue with their transgressions that we have been talking about for three years. We had heard stories of torture from some of the released detainees. They were kept at unknown locations and illegal detention centres.

For days in Biel, Switzerland, we discussed this issue with the coupists’ delegation and we insisted on the need to reach an agreement before any political talk. However, they did not give such subjects any importance.

For my colleagues in the government delegation and I, discussing these issues was necessary to build trust. It was crucial, an indicator of sorts showing the insurgents’ willingness to stop the war. As an affirmation of responsibility and values, and an expression of reassurance, we stressed that the case involved mutual obligations and the government didn’t want detainees with either parties. We asked about the fate of the abductees and we provided reports about them.

This raised a big question: How many detainees are there exactly? We demanded an official answer, but insurgents did not pay heed to our request.

We have not seen such inhumanity and lack of conscience. We sent an official letter to the envoy asking for time otherwise we’d suspend our participation in the consultations until we received a response.

Eventually, after pressures from the envoy and the sponsoring countries, insurgents showed willingness to address two humanitarian points: plight of detainees and besieged Taiz. The international community praised the agreement. However, until today this agreement has not been implemented.

The fate of the four leaders was one of the issues of discussion and we sent a formal written memorandum to the envoy and demanded an official response from the coup party.

No formal response has come. The head of Houthi delegation, Mohammed Abdulsalam, though took me aside and told me that Mahmoud Al Subaihi was fine and so was Faisal Rajab. The brother of President Hadi, Major General Nasser Mansour, too was fine. However, no information was given regarding Mohammed Al Qahtan. I insisted on discussing the issue in the presence of the envoys, and organising a visit to our abducted leaders after the talks. We agreed on that, but it has not happened so far. The consultations were scheduled to continue on January 14, 2016, to address political matters, but this meeting took place only on April 24 in Kuwait.

In Kuwait, the issue was repeatedly discussed and a joint committee was formed. Names were exchanged and the envoy’s office submitted a draft of a detailed agreement, which had been modified several times by the coupists.

The envoy and a number of sponsor countries’ ambassadors stated that a breakthrough has been achieved in the file of prisoners, detainees, abductees and forcibly disappeared. We tried many proposals to achieve a real breakthrough while insurgents continued with their evasive responses on not releasing the four leaders, saying that we were in a state of war and describing them as war prisoners. We proposed that they transfer the four detainees to Oman until the signing of the agreement and the end of the war.

We talked with Omani officials, but Houthis didn’t change their stance. They also insisted that detainees, including journalists, activists, politicians, anti-coupists, and even citizens were war prisoners.

Since my appointment as head of government delegation for talks, I was keen to make detainees the main issue to reach a political solution

We proposed a Red Cross visit to all, where they write down their names and inform their families of their situation in order to alleviate their pain. We agreed to include prisoners, detainees for the sake of facilitating the procedure for these Yemenis who deserve to return to their families. But in the end, and despite all our efforts and the efforts of the envoy, his team and the international community, they renounced each agreement, and reneged on their commitment of signing the agreement, which was altered several times upon their request.

The Kuwait talks ended after 100 days without any progress. The number of detainees increased and the destiny of many of them remained unknown. International efforts, including the efforts of former envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, failed to materialise in a visit to the detainees.

Houthi rebels lack morals and humane values. If they do not end this, they are nothing but beasts who will continue their crimes without any religious or human prohibitions. This will only end when our people get together and get rid of them and put an end to all the tragedies. — Asharq Al Awsat

Abdulmalik Al Mekhlafi is Yemen’s foreign minister