The aggression kingdom’s rejection (Saudi Arabia) of peace, payment of salaries, and lifting of the siege warns of a wide escalation

The leader of the revolution: the suffering of the Yemeni people will not continue without accountability, and the Saudi ambitious will not be achieved except through peace for Yemen.

De-escalation was the opportunity that the Sana’a government provided for the success of Omani mediation, but it ended in wrong Saudi bets.

Al-Thawrah / Abdulrahman Abdullah:
In recent months, Saudi Arabia has been pushing towards repairing its relations with regional parties, including Syria and Iran. This impulse was not a shift in Saudi Arabia’s position on regional issues but rather limited tactical steps in the space that America made available to it. These steps neither benefit the people of the region nor harm the US interests for which Saudi Arabia has been mobilized for a long time.

While the US administration has given Saudi Arabia margin to act on the Iranian and Syrian files and has witnessed a diplomatic and political level of re-establishment of diplomatic relations with Iran, the return of Syria to the Arab League, and the exchange of ambassadors, there was no margin in the Yemeni file. Even the sending of a Saudi delegation to Sana’a was nothing but a provocative maneuver aimed at prolonging the dribbling and evasion the solution of humanitarian issues such as salaries, lifting the siege, and prisoners, maintaining the level of military de-escalation that has existed since the end of the UN armistice.

In the details of the discussions that took place in Sana’a at the end of Ramadan in the presence of the Omani mediator, the Saudi focus was on the appearance of Saudi Arabia’s role as a mediator. The presence of its delegation in Sana’a was accompanied by intensive media statements issued by several Saudi officials that “Saudi Arabia is mediating”, including Mohammed Al-Jaber, who was leading the Saudi delegation himself. Moreover, Saudi Arabia did not show any seriousness towards solving humanitarian issues or taking real steps towards peace. Its intentions were completely contrary to the requirements of that.

One step forward and two steps back This is how the aggression kingdom’s (Saudi Arabia) deals with the war it is waging on Yemen with the participation of a regional and international alliance. On the one hand, it tries to maintain the level of military de-escalation through sending its delegations and the statements of its officials. On the other hand, it insists on its absolute rejection of paying salaries to employees, lifts the siege on Hudaydah’s ports and Sana’a airport, and even in the file of prisoners, it puts obstacles to completing the exchange.

Behind this regressive tactic, the Saudi aggression kingdom seeks to complicate the situation in Yemen by, as they say, “putting the cart before the horse. As soon as the Omani efforts show positive indicators, Saudi Arabia presents itself as a mediator, not a party to the war that it declared, funded, and waged on Yemen. On the other hand, it seeks to continue the suffering of the Yemeni people due to the siege and aggression and the interruption of salaries, in light of arrangements being conducted by it with the rest of the parties to the aggression alliance in the field, especially in the occupied southern and eastern provinces.

The stance taken by Sana’a is that the humanitarian issue must be resolved first, starting with paying salaries, lifting the siege, and exchanging detainees, before moving on to the military issue and finally the political one. Regarding the first point, the US administration outright and unequivocally opposes the payment of salaries, viewing them as unreasonable and extreme demands. The Saudi aggression kingdom, which does not publicly state its opinion but does not break from its contexts, takes the same stance. In the siege file, the countries of the aggression alliance want it to be within the allowed framework of a limited number of ships and flights per month. Furthermore, they want to move quickly from the humanitarian issue to the military and political issues, not in an effort to resolve them but rather to obstruct the peace process and make it less likely to produce definitive results.

Intensive Saudi setbacks:
The Saudi mission showed a retreat from the issues raised in Sana’a, just as it had attempted to position itself as a mediator from the moment its delegation arrived in Sana’a. In a press conference held during his visit to Aden, Ambassador Mohammed Al-Jaber said that the discussions with Sana’a had produced no results. Additionally, the Jeddah Summit’s statement went even further, reiterating the Gulf Initiative, which was dead for many years, and UN Security Council Resolution 2216, which analysts describe as an absurd resolution. All of this demonstrates that Saudi Arabia continues to place the wrong bets.

The humanitarian suffering of the Yemeni people has tragically escalated, and the Saudi aggression kingdom, along with the rest of the coalition members, wants to invest in that suffering and preserve its causes to create a new scene in its favor through the current confusing situation.

Wrong bets:
Sayyed Abdulmalik Al-Houthi, the leader of the revolution, declared in his speech on the anniversary of Al-Sarkha against the arrogantes that the agony of the Yemeni people will not go on indefinitely without accountability. He emphasized that Saudi Arabia cannot bring itself peace and stability unless it achieves peace in Yemen, pays salaries, compensates for damages, rebuilds, lifts the siege, and ends the occupation. He highlighted that ending the war in Yemen is necessary in order for Saudi Arabia to realize its economic goals.

The leader of the revolution clarified that the bets that Saudi Arabia is relying on are wrong, warning against maintaining the current situation, and his position is clear the continuation of the de-escalation is tied to two essential files: paying salaries to employees, lifting the siege and exchanging prisoners.

In contrast to Saudi evasion and procrastination, Sana’a has shown a high level of flexibility in dealing with the negotiations. If Saudi Arabia is serious about breaking free from American directives, then Yemen is the litmus test. It should translate into ending the criminal aggression on Yemen.

The Saudi aggression kingdom has merely spread misleading information about the humanitarian issue, which might result in a brief ceasefire, and does not appear to be interested in long-term peace or a truce. Despite its aggressive war, siege, killings, and destruction, it does not want to take any concrete actions like paying salaries or lifting the siege; instead, it just wants to act as a mediator.

According to Sayyed Abdulmalik Al-Houthi, the window of opportunity for Omani efforts may soon close because the current de-escalation cannot last forever. Sana’a, however, is dedicated to the requirements of a fair resolution and an honorable peace based on attending to the humanitarian issue first, and by doing so, Saudi Arabia may achieve peace for itself and the entire region.