Ansarollah Official Website | Report by: Ali Al-Darwani
Yemeni oppression transcends the boundaries of mere political characterization and passing media coverage, forming one of the most painful human tragedies in contemporary history. It is a tragedy that knew no borders, extending to suffocate the bodies of an entire people and the foundations of a whole nation under the weight of brutal bombardment and an unjust siege. The contours of this oppression were finalized when this people were robbed of their right to express their pain through continuous attempts to falsify the causes of their suffering, erase its true national and humanitarian dimensions, and mislead the world and public opinion with absurd justifications. Whenever Riyadh exhausted one pretext, it fabricated another—ranging from the alleged "legitimacy," through the excuse of Iran, all the way to clinging to the drapes of the Kaaba.
The Yemeni response to the Saudi aggression—which represents, in its essence, a purely sovereign issue tied to the inherent right to self-defense, protecting the land, and safeguarding the dignity of the people, regardless of any regional polarization or agendas—is something Saudi Arabia attempts to categorize as aggression against it. It acts as if, after years of attacking and blockading, the Yemenis were expected to greet it with flowers. Across the years of confrontation, this response has been purely Yemeni in its premises and goals, expressing the free aspirations of Yemenis and categorically rejecting any attempts to create pretexts or link their national cause to external calculations.
The Saudi aggression manifested in every detail of its field and humanitarian tragedy. The victims, who exceeded fifty thousand between martyrs and wounded, were Yemeni women and children—not external actors. The smart, dumb, and cluster bombs were falling on Sana'a, not Tehran, and the blood spilled in wedding halls and funeral halls was the blood of the sons of this nation. Furthermore, the bridges blown up and the lifelines destroyed were built to facilitate the lives and movement of Yemenis, rendering claims of a "regional conflict" a blatantly exposed distortion of the field reality and the humanitarian tragedy.
Pillars of Resilience
Yemen succeeded in keeping this confrontation at its national level as a battle of honor and dignity, anchoring its resilience and resistance on several fundamental pillars. The first of these is reliance on Allah Almighty, depending on Him, seeking His assistance, and asking Him for success and victory.
National Discourse and the Supreme Interest
The political and media statements of the Republic of Yemen focused on the fact that the confrontation is being waged to achieve independence of decision-making, lift the blockade, secure a dignified life for citizens, protect territorial lands and regional waters, and reject external guardianship—whether Saudi or American—while highlighting the independence of Yemeni decision-making in choosing peace or war.
This was accompanied by building a comprehensive internal front. The participation of a broad segment of various Yemeni people in confronting the aggression and in shaping the political and military decision-making dealt a striking blow to Riyadh, shattering the pretext of portraying the conflict as a "proxy war." Moreover, opening channels of dialogue among independent national components contributed to agreeing on an inclusive vision for managing the country and forming the first purely Yemeni government, far removed from any foreign intervention.
The strategy did not neglect invoking international laws and charters, grounding the Yemeni response particularly in Article (51) of the UN Charter, which guarantees peoples the legitimate right to self-defense against foreign aggression. This went hand-in-hand with documenting violations and demanding the opening of ports and airports, payment of salaries, and disbursement of compensation as guaranteed legal and humanitarian rights completely unlinked to any regional axes.
Dismantling Aggression’s Propaganda
Riyadh’s narrative relied on linking its military crises and defeats against Yemen to Iran, backed by political and media calculations aimed at marketing the conflict regionally and internationally, mobilizing Western support, and justifying the human and material costs to public opinion. In essence, this narrative sought to obstruct radical solutions by reducing the suffering and oppression of the Yemeni people to what Riyadh labels a "proxy war." However, Yemenis foiled and exposed this narrative both on the ground and politically by relying on national pillars to tear down and dismantle the media and political propaganda that accompanied the aggression—propaganda that sought at times to market the war as a "regional proxy conflict" and at other times as a "civil war."
Every day of the aggression demonstrated that the direct targeting of ports, airports, bridges, power stations, and factories aimed at destroying the infrastructure of the Yemeni state as a whole, rather than a specific faction. Similarly, the martyrdom of tens of thousands of children and women proved that the bombardment did not distinguish between one component and another, nor was it directed to support one party against another; rather, it aimed to weaken Yemen as a whole and exploit some to achieve these malicious objectives.
This contradiction is clearly revealed through Riyadh’s own political behavior. While it justified its aggression as a war to "confront Iranian influence in Yemen," it was simultaneously seeking to improve Saudi-Iranian relations. A major breakthrough occurred under Chinese sponsorship, leading to an exchange of official visits, the reopening of embassies, and the consolidation of direct relations between the two countries. Thus, continuing to target and blockade Yemen under the pretext of Iran—at a time when Saudi Arabia builds its best direct relations with Tehran—publicly reveals that the aggression targets Yemen itself, its sovereignty, and its strategic location, rather than being a proxy conflict as promoted by the Saudi media machine.
In a related context, reliance on domestic military development and manufacturing (such as drones and missiles) proved that the response stems from pure Yemeni willpower and capacity, refuting claims of dependency. Political and media messaging remained steadfast on the objective of ending the blockade and establishing sovereignty. As for the pretext of "legitimacy," the responsibility for shattering its idol fell upon the Saudi regime itself. Through its management of political and military battles, its formation of the so-called "Presidential Council" and successive controlled governments after removing Hadi—to whose neck the alleged legitimacy was tied—alongside the creation and dissolution of armed factions, the Saudi aggression exposed that sovereign decision-making was stripped from those tools to subjugate Yemeni decisions. Furthermore, the coalition’s military presence in remote areas and ports that witnessed no armed conflict (such as Hadramout, Al-Mahra, and Socotra) proved that the true objectives of the aggression are dominance and the expansion of influence at the expense of Yemen, its security, and its stability.
In parallel, national media—by documenting live footage, the aftermath of airstrikes, and the resilience of fighters in the field—contributed to reinforcing the Yemeni narrative. It highlighted the stark contrast between the Yemeni army and hired hostile forces, maintaining a unified discourse focused on the people's oppression and their legitimate right to self-defense, whereas Saudi Arabia managed contradictory, warring factions with divided loyalties and fragmented leaderships united only by their political and financial dependence on foreign powers.
Ultimately, years of confrontation have proven that the tragedy experienced by Yemenis and the resilience they embodied stemmed from a purely Yemeni identity, path, and objective. The continuous attempt to cloak the aggression under regional titles or proxy conflicts was nothing more than an attempt by the aggressor to evade moral and legal accountability toward the Yemeni people. Independent decision-making and self-will remain the true standard that defeated projects of hegemony and re-established Yemen as a sovereign political actor that rejects guardianship over its decisions and refuses to let Yemen be a back garden for anyone.
The peak of the oppression endured by the Yemeni people lies in the aggressors' attempt to confiscate the truth of this pain by reducing the agony of an entire nation and portraying its defense of its legitimate right to life and sovereignty as merely a proxy conflict or a passing political file. It is the oppression of a people denied the most basic necessities of daily life, wronged twice: first by direct bombardment and blockade, and second by the falsification of their plight and the denial of their inherent right to cry out in the face of their tormentors.
