Commentary
Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.
Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov
Source: Getty
Paper
What Comes Next in Yemen? Al-Qaeda, the Tribes, and State-Building
There are limits to how much foreign intervention can accomplish in Yemen. To overcome its daunting security, economic, and political challenges, Yemen’s political system needs to become less centralized and more inclusive.
By Sarah Phillips
Published on Mar 11, 2010
Western policy makers are scrambling to respond decisively to Yemen’s instability after the failed Christmas Day attack on a U.S. passenger jet was tied to al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. But there are limits to how much foreign intervention can accomplish—Yemen’s political system needs to become less centralized and more inclusive.
Key Conclusions:
- Although it is feared that Yemen’s collapse could usher in a Taliban-style regime and create a haven for al-Qaeda, the regime’s failure would not necessarily be a win for the militants. Al-Qaeda arguably benefits more from Yemen’s weak state.
- Even though there are areas in Yemen that lack formal state control, this does not mean that they are ungoverned—there are local mechanisms that maintain a level of order. Al-Qaeda is trying to present itself as an alternative to the regime, but as it grows stronger and seeks control of more territory, it risks competing with local tribes.
- Al-Qaeda’s goal of establishing an international caliphate, propensity for extreme violence against civilians, and hard-line religious ideology conflict with local norms and weaken al-Qaeda’s appeal to the Yemeni people, including the tribes.
Policy Implications:
- Western policy makers need to consider the intricacies of Yemen’s domestic politics before responding. Military intervention, like the U.S.-assisted air strikes in December, is likely to further entrench al-Qaeda in the country by inflaming public grievances.
- Merely increasing development assistance risks reinforcing a regime that is poorly equipped and poorly motivated to effectively distribute aid.
“The establishment of a more stable political settlement is a domestic endeavor, and Westerners’ chances of encouraging a more inclusive political system are questionable,” writes Phillips. “In the long term, only a fundamental restructuring of the political system to become much more inclusive will lead to stability.”
About the Author
Sarah Phillips
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 Russia Eurasia Center
- Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?
- How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?Commentary
Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.
Nikita Smagin
- The Kremlin Is Destroying Its Own System of Coerced VotingCommentary
The use of technology to mobilize Russians to vote—a system tied to the relative material well-being of the electorate, its high dependence on the state, and a far-reaching system of digital control—is breaking down.
Andrey Pertsev
- Can the Disparate Threads of Ukraine Peace Talks Be Woven Together?Commentary
Putin is stalling, waiting for a breakthrough on the front lines or a grand bargain in which Trump will give him something more than Ukraine in exchange for concessions on Ukraine. And if that doesn’t happen, the conflict could be expanded beyond Ukraine.
Alexander Baunov
- Notes From Kyiv: Is Ukraine Preparing for Elections?Commentary
As discussions about settlement and elections move from speculation to preparation, Kyiv will have to manage not only the battlefield, but also the terms of political transition. The thaw will not resolve underlying tensions; it will only expose them more clearly.
Balázs Jarábik
