• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Farea Al-Muslimi"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Gulf",
    "Yemen",
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Security"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Welcome to Yemen, Where Only Violence is a Certainty

In order for peace to exist in Yemen, the ingredients of the political transition—its tools and its godfathers—should first admit that the path they have forced Yemen into has led to nothing but catastrophe.

Link Copied
By Farea Al-Muslimi
Published on Mar 22, 2015

Source: National

I had only been back in Yemen for a few hours. Until then, I had been lucky enough to escape the recent round of violence, having been abroad for medical treatment.

But that January morning my alarm call was a bomb that targeted the Iranian embassy in the usually quiet part of town where I live. The whole building shook when the explosives detonated. Most of the windows in the neighboring buildings shattered. I felt as if someone had lifted me out of bed and thrown me to the ground.

Violence has slowly become the norm in Yemen. It has spread around the country, motivating militias to commit atrocities and paralysing any form of accountability. It has made Yemen one of the most dangerous places on the planet.

Over the past two years, many Yemenis, myself included, have warned of the dangers of the political path the UN has brought to Yemen: a “transitional model” that has ultimately brought more violence than peace and killed any aspirations of democracy, social justice and cohesion.

In 2014, Barack Obama suggested Yemen as a model of peace that could be implemented in Iraq. Months later, Yemen fell into the hands of militias.  

The UN’s policy in Yemen has done more harm than good. After putting Yemeni lives at the mercy of militias this year, all diplomats left Sanaa, heading to safe places while ordinary people are unsure if they’ll be able to safely return to their families each day.  

Some embassies spent days shredding documents trying to leave nothing behind, but in doing so sent a terrifying signal of their lack of faith in the process of transition they had previously backed so wholeheartedly.

Before the embassies were evacuated, and around the same time as the bombing of the Iranian embassy, I had spent Friday paying condolences to four different families whose sons had been killed in a bomb blast outside a Sanaa police academy.

One, Wael, was an old school friend who had only gone to register at the academy on that fateful day. Wael is survived by a young wife and family. Another, Ameer, left behind a sick wife and two children to his brother’s family and his parents. I spent that whole day in a depressed state of mind.

In January, clashes broke out in the capital. As Houthi forces kidnapped a senior government official, fighting erupted around the presidential palace. The president resigned, as did Khaled Bahah, the prime minister, who was one of the few popular figures in Yemen. The country collapsed again.

After years of selling false hope to Yemenis and enforcing a political reality that created conflicts rather than peace, the UN began to seek a new senseless deal. Yemenis, meanwhile, were busy wondering where all of this left them.

And no matter how bad it seemed at that point, we had not yet reached rock bottom.

Last Friday, Sanaa witnessed the bloodiest terrorist attack yet on two mosques, killing more than 140 worshippers and injuring over 200. The same day, army jets flew from Sanaa under Houthi control with the intention of trying to kill Abdrabu Mansur Hadi in Aden. 

Four years after the 2011 Karama Massacre, a tragic event in Yemeni history when more than 50 protesters lost their lives at the hands of the former president’s security forces, it is hard to believe that Yemen has slipped even further into the abyss.

Violence and a declining quality of life have come to represent Yemen. The number of Yemenis now subsumed by the country’s continuing humanitarian crisis numbers 16 million. Basic functioning services have all become as rare as birthdays—a once a year event.

At the moment, Yemen’s once quiet streets and civic spaces have turned into spaces for militias and unknown suicide bombers. In Sanaa, no one but death walks freely or safely.

In order for peace to exist in Yemen, the ingredients of the political transition—its tools and its godfathers—should first admit that the path they have forced Yemen into has led to nothing but catastrophe and has taken the country directly into hell.

The world has walked Yemenis into this process and should take responsibility for that. They have broken Yemen and it is time to pay for it.

A policy of running loose and meaningless dialogues while the state institutions are under occupation—as has been happening—is simply a waste of time and a path that is only killing more Yemenis.

Those who dreamt up the “Yemen model” should be made to fix the damage they have caused.

This article was originally published by the National.

About the Author

Farea Al-Muslimi

Research fellow at Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa Programme

Farea Al-Muslimi is a research fellow at Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Master of the Middle

      Farea Al-Muslimi

  • Commentary
    A History of Missed Opportunities: Yemen and the GCC

      Farea Al-Muslimi

Farea Al-Muslimi
Research fellow at Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa Programme
Farea Al-Muslimi
Political ReformSecurityGulfYemenMiddle East

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Emissary
    The Iran War Is Uncovering the Weakness in U.S.-Gulf Ties

    Neither the Abraham Accords nor the presence of large U.S. bases are enough to protect Arab Gulf states.

      Marwan Muasher

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for Russia

    Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.

      Ruslan Suleymanov

  • Photo of Balen Shah taking a selfie with a group of Nepali adults and children.
    Article
    A New Generation Takes Power in Nepal

    The incoming government has swept Nepal’s election. The real work begins now.

      Amish Raj Mulmi

  • U.S. President Donald Trump (C) oversees "Operation Epic Fury" with (L-R) Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles at Mar-a-Lago on February 28, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida. President Trump announced today that the United States and Israel had launched strikes on Iran targeting political and military leaders, as well as Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs. (Photo by Daniel Torok/White House via Getty Images)
    Paper
    Operation Epic Fury and the International Law on the Use of Force

    Assessing U.S. compliance with the international laws of war is essential at a time when these frameworks are already fraying.

      • Federica D'Alessandra

      Federica D’Alessandra

  • apan's 8,900-ton Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ship Oosumi leaves Muroran port escorted by the 4,550-ton destroyer Murasame bound for Kuwait February 20, 2004 in Muroran, Japan.
    Article
    Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic Reality

    Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.