For Yemen, Riyadh has never been keen on unity at any point in time. It has consistently viewed a unified Yemen as a geopolitical nightmare that must be aborted, or at the very least transformed into a hollow, spiritless cardboard structure. This is the bare truth that Saudi rulers attempted to beautify for decades. However, the echo of a separatist anthem played in the heart of the Saudi capital, on the eve of a meeting with southern Yemeni figures, has eliminated any remaining doubt. The performance was not a mere protocol lapse; it was a declaration of a game Riyadh is now playing openly. For Saudi Arabia, a fragmented Yemen is preferable to a unified one.

Recently, the official narrative in Riyadh had hinted—sometimes explicitly—at dissatisfaction with Emirati moves in the south, portraying Abu Dhabi’s support for separatist projects as a deviation from the coalition’s objectives and a blow to the legitimacy of a unified Yemen. Today, with the separatist anthem being played in the heart of Riyadh under official sponsorship, an unavoidable question arises: why was secession an Emirati sin yesterday, only to become a permissible Saudi vision today? Is the difference in the project itself, or in the identity of the financier? Has Riyadh shifted from the slogan of preserving Yemen’s unity to competing with Abu Dhabi over who divides it first?

It becomes evident that the difference was never about principle, but about who holds the reins. The Kingdom—long wary of Abu Dhabi’s exclusive influence in southern Yemen—has decided to absorb the secessionist project for itself, turning it into a Saudi-flavored partition that guarantees lasting influence, far from exhausted unity slogans and far from Emirati tools.

Within this context, the billions of dollars Riyadh injects to support the Aden government and the Central Bank raise major questions. Observers believe these funds are not driven by love for the so-called legitimacy, nor by a genuine attempt to rescue a collapsing economy. Rather, they are seen as political amusements and instruments of absolute control. Saudi Arabia is using money as a weapon to buy loyalties, pull the rug from under Emirati tools in the south, and transform them into purely Saudi instruments executing Riyadh’s agenda under the cover of development support. It is an organized takeover of Yemeni decision-making, reducing the “Aden government” to a mere façade for passing regional domination projects.

The most pitiful scene, however, is the stance of Yemeni elites residing in Riyadh hotels. These are the same figures who once filled the air with denunciations of dependence on the UAE in the name of protecting sovereignty and unity, yet today find themselves silent witnesses in halls where an anthem of tearing their country apart is played. To them, a direct question is posed: why was secession rejected when it carried an Emirati flavor, but now appears acceptable, blessed, and even palatable with a Saudi flavor? The answer is clear. For these elites, unity has shifted from a national cause to a paid job performed for whoever covers the hotel bill. Accepting Yemen’s division under Saudi supervision proves that, for them, sovereignty is merely a commodity bought and sold according to who pays more.

What occurred in Riyadh was not merely a consultative meeting; it was an acknowledgment that the conflict between the two poles of the coalition witnessed over the past two months was never about a single Yemen. It was about who manages the partition process and who gets to hold the knife to carve up the nation. While separatist anthems are played and economic anesthesia funds are pumped in, the Yemeni people remain the sole victims of these regional “flavors” that coldly place the knife on the map of their country, believing they will complete their project. Yet such hopes are in vain. The future and destiny of Yemen remains to be untity.