A Fair and Realistic Response to the Briefing of the UN Special Envoy to Yemen

REPORTS - 18 day ago

South Eye | Report - Exclusive

The recent briefing presented by the UN Special Envoy to Yemen, Hans Grundberg, reflects ongoing efforts to address the Yemeni crisis through a political settlement based on regional and international consensus. However, it is necessary to clarify that pragmatism should not be narrowly interpreted as mere international consensus or external compromise while ignoring the will of peoples, particularly the just and rational demands of the people of South Yemen.

Pragmatism, in its most meaningful sense, should stem from tangible changes on the ground and the popular will. The demands of the people of South are inherently pragmatic, legal, and legitimate. They are rooted in the realities of history, security, politics, and economics, and stem from lived experience rather than mere abstract ideals.

It is striking that the international community continues to overlook the extent of the injustice and occupation experienced by the people of South since the 1994 war, despite full awareness of what happened — including the invasion, looting of the state's institutions, dismissal of its personnel, destruction of its national identity, and marginalization of its people. A people that had established a state recognized by the international community prior to 1990. But after three decades of failure, destruction, and war, the people of South now seeks to correct the course of history through peaceful and institutional means — not with the aim of expansion, but for protection and stability.

Southern people's issue is not ideological or expansionist, but defensive, realistic, and grounded in rights. The South has never pursued expansion in the North. Rather, the Northern forces, whether represented by the Houthis Militias or terrorist groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, have consistently pursued domination and aggression. This reality is clear to every fair observer, and yet the proposed solutions appear to push toward forcing the South to live under models it fundamentally rejects — such as the Houthi regime, which is designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States, and whose rule contradicts modern statehood and the aspirations of the southern people.

In the same context, one must ask: how can a people who have fought tirelessly to rid their land of terrorism be forced to coexist with factions linked to extremist ideologies or those who supported terrorism, such as the Islah Party? The South's security efforts were not coincidental; they came as part of a deliberate strategy that cost lives and resources, resulting in notable success in restoring local peace in large parts of the South.

Furthermore, the concept of political settlements should be built on facts and transformations on the ground, not a limited pragmatic vision shaped solely by external pressure. True pragmatism must be based on respect for people's decisions, not dismissing them. Any imposed formula that disregards the clear southern reality risks not only failure but also the reignition of conflict and deepening instability in the region.

For illustrative comparison, imagine suggesting that S. Korea and N. Korea be forced into political unity today. Could such a proposition be imposed without massive rejection from both peoples? Despite decades of separation, each has chosen a distinct path. Similarly, the people of South have developed a unique political and social vision incompatible with northern regimes — whether Houthi militias or Brotherhood-aligned.

Thus, the Southern people’s demand for the restoration of its independent state is neither a rejection of peace nor an obstacle to negotiation. On the contrary, it is an essential pillar for any realistic and lasting solution. It is irrational to expect the South to accept solutions similar to what happened in Iraq — where for more than two decades, the country has suffered from a fragmented system alien to its people and dominated by regional and international interference.

Thus, the international community should support the Southern Transitional Council in ongoing building institutions based on balanced mechanism from the international standards, while respecting its instinct identity. This support is not only a recognition of the South’s sacrifices but also an investment in regional stability.

In conclusion, Yemen cannot bear more years of collapse and futile settlement projects. What is needed is a just and inclusive political vision that acknowledges the facts on the ground and embraces the aspirations of the people — especially those who have paid the heaviest price for peace, identity, dignity, and security.