The Southern Fair Aspirations

التالى السابق

Southern Position, Popular, Historical, and Legal، Towards Restoring Its Independent Southern State

Aden for strategic studies - منذ 19 يوم

South Eye | Report - Exclusive

Amid the confrontation with the Iran-backed Houthi militia, the issue of a comprehensive political process is once again being proposed as a step toward resolving the crisis. However, despite being promoted as a tactical move, this proposition clashes with a solid wall of rejection from the southern populace and political forces. This rejection is grounded in a long and painful experience that cannot be bypassed through coercion or pressure. The southern stance on any political engagement with the North is neither impulsive nor circumstantial; rather, it is a principled and unwavering position rooted in realistic, legal, and historical southern contexts, both locally and internationally.

The South experienced a unification with the Yemeni Republic in 1990, which quickly turned into a project of domination and exclusion. Over thirty years, especially following the 1994 invasion, the South endured systematic marginalization, organized looting of resources, destruction of institutions, and the uprooting of its political and cultural identities. This rendered the experience more akin to occupation than a political partnership..

This background renders any call for political participation within a settlement framework, unrealistic and lacking the minimum level of credibility. In essence, the South rejects any northern political project that does not recognize the South as an independent entity with its own aspirations, grievances, and its right to restore its state. Reducing the crisis to a mere political dimension while ignoring its deep-rooted popular and identity-based nature reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the conflict.

Today, the South is involved in a fragile government that lacks national sensibility and the bare minimum of responsibility, despite the justification of unifying ranks against the Houthi militia. However, this setup has only reproduced the trust crisis and planted the seeds of growing conflict. Including the South in any Yemeni equation that fundamentally contradicts its people's aspirations is doomed to fail.

Conversely, the South is not following a path of isolation. It seeks to fully assume responsibility for its people by building a stable state based on local efforts, good governance, and openness. Simultaneously, the South aligns with Gulf states in rejecting the Houthi militias, viewing it as a shared threat to the region as a whole for purely security-related and historical reasons.

The discussion about political concessions cannot be separated from the tools used to reach them. Does war create genuine opportunities for understanding? Experience shows that war, even if it compels parties to negotiate, leaves indelible scars on the collective consciousness of nations. Settlements born from coercion are often temporary and fragile, leading to more complex cycles of conflict. Therefore, pressuring the South to accept solutions that ignore its legitimate rights and aspirations under the guise of a comprehensive political process will not bring stability but will merely reproduce the crisis.

Looking at international experience, Russia Ukrain conflict, Russia did not subdue Kyiv. Instead, it generated internal cohesion, accelerated the accession of new NATO members, and relatively isolated Moscow. Hypothetically, had Russia adopted a soft power strategy using tools such as economics, culture, diplomacy, instead of costly military intervention, it might have gradually attracted Ukraine into its orbit, or at least prevented it from fully embracing the West. This case illustrates that while hard power may seem effective in the short term, but not for long-term.

Nations cannot be led through violence or coercion but must be persuaded through, recognition, and mutual respect. The South is not an obstacle to peace but a genuine partner, if treated as a people with sovereign aspirations, not as a functional entity in a failed and rejected unity project. Hence, international calls for a comprehensive settlement should be based on the recognition of two states and two peoples, each with the right to choose their path.

 Hoping that actors and international institutions will re-view the South not merely through geographical lenses or short-term calculations, but from a moral, historical, legal and strategic perspective. A stable and independent Southern state will be a contributing pillar to regional security and a building block for a balanced regional order. Persisting in the attempt to impose an outdated scenarios will only lead to increased aversion, resentment, and public rejection, as known