History, Religion, and Yemen

130730-D-NI589-141

by Thomas W. Lippman

When Abdul Aziz al-Saud, the founder of modern Saudi Arabia, was spreading his dominion across the Arabia peninsula nearly a century ago, one of his early decisions was to impose jizyah, the Muslim religious tax on unbelievers, on the Shiite residents of his new lands. Abdul Aziz was declaring them not to be Muslims.

In The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon writes that the seventh-century Persian monarch Chosroes “received an epistle from an obscure citizen of Mecca inviting him to acknowledge Mahomet as the apostle of God. He rejected the invitation and tore the epistle.” This act prompted the Prophet Muhammad to exclaim, “It is thus that God will tear the Persian kingdom, and reject the supplications of Chosroes.”

Fast-forward to Riyadh in 2011, a prominent Saudi government official, with a PhD from a university in the United States, took me aside to share a confidence. “The Shia,” he said, “is incapable of telling the truth. It is genetic.”

Those anecdotes, separated by centuries, give small clues to the historic animosities underlying the violence now savaging Yemen. Sunni and Shia Muslims, divided by irreconcilable beliefs about the succession to the Prophet’s temporal power, fell into armed conflict within a century of Muhammad’s death. Arabs and Persians are also historic enemies, their rivalry compounded by the fact that modern-day Iran embodies a political system prescribed by the Shiite formula.

For centuries those rivalries were mostly kept in check, by the Ottoman Empire and then by the British and the French. Now there is no outside force to restrain them.

That is why the current conflict in Yemen is so dangerous. It is not just about restoring the government of ousted president Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi to power in Sanaa. By assembling a coalition of at least 10 countries to wage war against the Iran-backed rebels known as Houthis who drove out Hadi, the Saudis and their partners have turned a civil war in a marginal country into a conflict that could spill onto other battlefields.

Because the Houthis, followers of the Zaydi school of Shiism, are supported by Iran, their recent battlefield successes in Yemen have exacerbated Saudi Arabia’s fear of being surrounded by Shiite enemies – in Yemen, in Iran, in Iraq (where Shiites control the government), and even in Lebanon (where the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia is the biggest political force). Bahrain, the tiny island principality just off the Saudi coast, is ruled by a Sunni dynasty and is participating in the anti-Houthi air campaign. But its restive population is mostly Shiite, and the Saudis saw Iran’s hand behind the Arab Spring uprising against the monarchy there.

Conversely, Iran has its own fear of encirclement. It now finds itself surrounded by Sunni members of the Saudi coalition who are committed to thwarting Iran’s Houthi allies and other Iran-backed groups in the region. The coalition includes Pakistan and Turkey, which have borders with Iran, as well as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, just across the Gulf. Some of the countries in that coalition, including Saudi Arabia, are also part of the international campaign to bring down Iran’s only Arab ally, the minority Alawite regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

By attacking the Houthis, the Saudis and their allies are taking on the only indigenous group in Yemen confronting al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, an ally of the Islamic State. Both extremist groups are Sunni Muslims but none the less committed to taking out the House of Saud.

Within Saudi Arabia, the Yemen intervention could create an uncomfortable test for its minority Shiites, perhaps 10 percent of the population. The jizyah tax on them was lifted decades ago, but they have long faced systematic and sometimes hateful discrimination. They have been largely excluded from government positions and are suspected by many of their fellow Saudis of being sympathetic to Iran. Many of their community leaders have long insisted that they are not agents of Iran and seek only to be accepted as full citizens of Saudi Arabia. The Yemen intervention does not seem likely to ease those sectarian tensions within the kingdom.

At an Arab summit conference over the weekend in Egypt—also a member of the Sunni coalition—King Salman of Saudi Arabia called on the Houthis to cease their “aggression,” return to a political process, and return all weapons they have captured from the arsenals of Hadi’s government. He said they should “listen to the voice of reason and stop depending on the power of foreign forces,” meaning Iran. The military operation, he said, “will continue until these objectives are achieved.” He offered no timetable.

Is Yemen worth all the anger, all the devastation, all the casualties, all the anger, all the risk? In material terms, probably not. It is a politically divided, unstable country with dismal economic prospects. But the conflict is no longer about Yemen. It is about contests of history and identity, and whichever side loses is bound to nurse resentments that will burst out again at some time in the future.

Photo: Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi welcomed in Washington, DC in 2013

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
avatar

Thomas Lippman

Thomas W. Lippman is a Washington-based author and journalist who has written about Middle Eastern affairs and American foreign policy for more than four decades, specializing in Saudi Arabian affairs, U.S.- Saudi relations, and relations between the West and Islam. He is a former Middle East bureau chief of the Washington Post, and also served as that newspaper's oil and energy reporter. Throughout the 1990s, he covered foreign policy and national security for the Post, traveling frequently to Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East. In 2003 he was the principal writer on the war in Iraq for Washingtonpost.com. Prior to his work in the Middle East, he covered the Vietnam war as the Washington Post's bureau chief in Saigon. Lippman has authored seven books about the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy. He is also an adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington, where he serves as the principal media contact on Saudi Arabia and U.S. – Saudi relations.

6 Comments

  1. Your PhD friend most probably paid 10x to get a piece of paper, but like the strawman in Wizards of Oz a diploma brings no brain. The Saudi regime has been raping and pillaging their country and its resources while the vast majority live in close to poverty standards. They are not afraid of the Persians, they are afraid of anyone who can think and they can not buy.

  2. to bigan44: Iranian are not Arab’s cousin just unfortunate neighbors

  3. Arab Spring in Bahrain, Syria and now Yemen are wars of poor against rich. Not between Iran and Saudi family in Arabia, Shiah against Sunni in the region. The main objective of Arab people like their Iranians cousins in 1979 was, they want to kick foreign powers out of their region first and than share the wealth that western powers so generously gave to tribal leaders like Saudi family in Arabia and Kuwaitis in Iraq. Lets face it, now that Saudis are bombing the defenseless people of Yemen, and no Western Human Right organizations are protesting and crying war crimes against Saudis. Either people win this war or the stooges will, like they did in Egypt. But this war will not end in Yemen and not soon.

  4. Well, at least S.A. and the willing, get to use those wonderful war toys the U.S. provides for those $$$billions. Oh yes, other countries chip in on the weapons provided, at cost too I’m sure. I wonder, do the Shiite in S.A. hold 2nd class citizenship? Considering who holds the purse strings in S.A., then, like in Iran, where it’s the other way around, isn’t this really a case of the “pot calling the kettle black”? I suppose it’s not too different then what goes on in the U.S. Congress, (though the Demos & Repugs don’t kill each other), different strokes for different folks. Considering how long this has been going on, perhaps it’s time to let them slug it out, without the U.S. standing by on one side?

  5. “By assembling a coalition of at least 10 countries to wage war against the Iran-backed rebels known as Houthis ..”
    That war-waging has yet to be demonstrated. Al Arabiya (Saudi) News report from the recent conference:
    “The Arab League on Sunday called for the establishment of a voluntary, unified military force that member states can turn to when facing security challenges. The statement, issued in the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh, calls for establishing a voluntary Arab military force that can intervene to counter challenges that threaten the safety and security of any member, based on a specific request from that state.”

Comments are closed.