The Armistice Reaches a dead end: No Extension of the Current Version and No Signs of a New Agreement

Indications are increasing towards the beginning of a new military phase in Yemen, as the humanitarian truce has reached a dead end. After Sanaa approved the extension of the armistice, in an opportunity to save the agreement, it was proven that the coalition of aggression is merely trying to gain time to rearrange the ranks of its disintegrating forces. Thus, this left no choice but to probably start the confrontation as soon as the current truce ends, on August 2. However, this time, Sanaa confirms that the repercussions will be broader and more effective than in any previous stage.

Circumvention of peace entitlements threatens to resume the battle

The member of the national negotiating delegation, Abdul-Malik al-Ajri, said: “The attempt to reduce peace and the benefits of the humanitarian file to extending the truce in its current form is a miserable attempt that will bring disappointment and disaster upon its owners.”

This also comes in the context of responding to US President Joe Biden’s recent statement about “approving the extension of the armistice”, a statement previously denounced by the Supreme Political Council; Because it misleads public opinion and ignores the reality of the aggression coalition’s intransigence and refusal to implement the obligations of the agreement.

Accordingly, Saudi Arabia and the United States of America are using the truce as a propaganda “cover” to evade the repercussions of the continuation of the aggression and siege, and to gain time to shuffle their cards. It is not surprising that Riyadh and Washington announced their agreement to “extend” this current situation in Yemen.

Al-Ajri’s statement clearly indicates that Sana’a will not allow this, and that the enemy will soon find itself in front of limited options: either approaching the requirements of real peace, on top of which is stopping the aggression and siege, and this will include at least paying salaries and lifting all restrictions on Sana’a airport and the port of Hodeidah, or the return of confrontation, with all its scenarios and possibilities of response and deterrence.

In this context, the repercussions of the option of continuing the aggression and siege and the return of confrontation, according to the member of the national delegation, “will not be limited to Yemen and its damage will be more general and comprehensive,” which means that blocking the horizon of the armistice as a step towards actual peace will result in a new stage of the war that the countries of aggression will not be able to avoid its effects in any way.

The head of the national delegation, the spokesman for Ansar Allah, Mohammed Abdusalam, had warned a few days ago that failure to achieve peace and stability in Yemen would harm the security and stability of the entire region.

Al-Ajri explains that Sana’a “is still working to avoid this option,” indicating that the opportunity is still available for the coalition and its sponsors to stop intransigence and implement the agreements of the truce during the remaining days of the extension.

Only one flight has been operated between Sanaa and Cairo since the announcement of the armistice, yet the coalition of aggression found it enough to be proud of it as a positive step and to exchange expressions of thanks between the leaders of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Egypt regarding it.

Therefore, the real solution that can prevent the deterioration of the armistice and the return of confrontation is to move to a binding, guaranteed and fast-acting agreement, in addition to being broad in its humanitarian and economic terms, so that it does not allow room for manipulation of its terms, as is the case with the current agreement, and this was what the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Salvation Government, Hussein Al-Ezzi, had referred to it earlier.

In other words: Any upcoming extension of the armistice will not be contingent on increasing the number of flights or fuel ships only, but on lifting the restrictions of the blockade, including stopping the detention of ships and stopping hindering the arrival of the agreed flights. In addition, comprehensive economic and humanitarian treatments must be agreed upon, which include paying salaries and unifying Revenues, and the exchange of prisoners.

The UN envoy misleads the world

One of the prominent negative indicators that confirm that the armistice is going in the wrong direction is the behavior of the United Nations and its Special Envoy, Hans Grundberg, whose complicity with the coalition of aggression is becoming increasingly flagrant with the passage of time.

In his recent briefing before the Security Council, Grundberg crudely provided false and misleading information about the parties’ handling of the truce, as he completely ignored the continued detention of fuel ships and preventing their entrance to the port of Hodeidah by the aggression countries and their sponsors. Instead, he tried to cover that up with an instructive talk about “ The benefits” of entering a limited number of fuel ships (after holding them for periods), and even praising the “smooth flow of fuel” and attributing the credit to the UN inspection mechanism whose permits granted to ships are clearly ignored and challenged by the coalition of aggression.

On the other hand, the envoy deliberately accused Sanaa directly of obstructing the file of opening roads in Taiz and other governorates, ignoring the military ambitions that the coalition of aggression wants to achieve through blackmail in this file, and their blatant rejection of Sana’a’s initiatives to open several roads as the first stage in Taiz and several governorates.

This picture presented by the UN envoy to the Security Council makes talking about the possibility of saving the truce and expanding its advantages just a difficult theory to implement. The reason because of the behavior of the United Nations, along with the behavior of the coalition of aggression, who are trying to restrict Sanaa from using its military options and drag it into a whirlpool of absurd discussions and dead ends while the siege and hostilities continue, and the arrangement of ranks within the aggression camp.

In sum, Sanaa’s positive position and their practically proven keenness to make the truce succeed and move it to a new stage that alleviates the suffering of the Yemeni people, does not seem sufficient to achieve the desired progress, as it seems that the coalition of aggression and the United Nations rely mainly on this position to exploit it. In order to prolong the state of aggression and siege, and circumvent the legitimate entitlements of the Yemenis.

Hence, Sanaa’s warnings, which have increased recently regarding the consequences of continued intransigence, may be the last chance for the aggression coalition and its sponsors.