التالى السابق

US Statement Brings Two-State Option Back to Forefront.. Future of the South on the Settlement Table

REPORTS - منذ 59 دقيقة

Aden . Ain Al-Janoub || Exclusive

The future of the state's structure has returned to the forefront of political debate, following remarks by former US Envoy to Yemen Tim Lenderking on Sky News, in which he spoke about the possibility of the country returning to two states remaining valid, while stressing that determining the future of unity or any other form of state should be through a political process in which Yemenis participate, not by imposing options from outside.

The statement gains importance in light of the ongoing political and military division the country is experiencing, which has made the issue of the state's form and its future one of the most complex issues in any upcoming negotiation track. After years during which international discussion focused largely on preserving the one-state formula, talk of the two-state possibility has re-raised a fundamental question about the form that the next political settlement could take.

Lenderking confirmed that the possibility of returning to two states is still on the table, pointing out that resolving this issue must be done through the negotiating table and through a political process that brings together the concerned parties, making the form of the state part of the outcomes of dialogue rather than a result imposed in advance on the parties.

These statements come at a time when discussions are increasing about the southern issue and its place in any comprehensive political settlement, especially with the continuation of southern demands to reformulate the future of the South on a political basis that expresses the aspirations of its people, and to put forward options related to self-determination and building a southern state that manages its political, security and economic affairs.

From this angle, talk about the possibility of returning to two states does not in itself represent a political decision or an announcement of a settled path, but it reflects a shift in the nature of the debate about the future of the state, and confirms that the form of the upcoming political and geographical system cannot be separated from the reality of existing divisions and the demands of different forces and communities.

The statement also highlights the importance of any upcoming negotiations being comprehensive of core issues, foremost among them the southern issue, instead of merely addressing military or economic files in isolation from the roots of the political conflict. Previous experiences have shown that ignoring issues related to identity, political representation and the form of the state leaves the door open for crises to continue even after agreements are signed.

For the South, recent developments reaffirm that the future of the southern issue will remain present in any serious discussion about a settlement, especially in light of southern forces continuing to put forward their own vision for the future of the South, and demanding that its people have a fundamental role in determining the form of their state, its political system and its institutions.

On the other hand, reaching any final formula requires a clear political path that ensures the participation of relevant parties, and puts political options on the negotiating table away from imposing predetermined results. This makes the next stage dependent on the ability of the parties to move from managing the conflict to directly discussing its roots and future issues.

While Lenderking's statement does not mean that the return of two states has become a settled matter, merely raising the possibility again at the level of international political debate opens up wider space to talk about multiple options for the future of the state, and places the southern issue before a new political entitlement represented in transforming demands and visions into a clear project that can be put forward within any comprehensive negotiation process.

Thus the question of the state returns to the heart of the scene: will the one-state formula continue, or will the next settlement go towards a different formula, including the two-state option? The answer will not be decided by a single statement, but will be determined through the balance of politics, the course of negotiations and the will of the concerned parties, foremost among them the southern forces and the southern communities who own the land, whose future is directly linked to any upcoming political formula that takes into account the right of southerners to establish their independent state with Aden as its capital.