NEOCONS HAVE THEIR SIGHTS ON YEMEN

White House warnings of an increased terrorist threat from Al Qaeda in Yemen have overshadowed the fact that neocons have been privately arguing for a large U.S. military footprint in that country. But, neocons are not the only ones telling the Obama administration to open a major base in the Port of Aden in South Yemen. Israel, Saudi Arabia and India believe it would be an important strategic move to consolidate a Western presence in the Gulf. They feel it would place even more pressure on Iran and would provide the U.S and India with an enhanced naval profile in the Indian Ocean through which China moves most of its commerce.
Yemen has a unique and highly significant geographical presence that makes it strategically vital for all shipping using the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, straddling Asia and the Middle East. The British in particular know all about Aden because the port and its surroundings were a British colony ruled from India during the days of Empire, whereas the north was part of the Ottoman Empire until the end of World War 1. Later, tribes loyal to Saudi Arabia and Egypt fought over it. In 1967, Britain granted Aden independence after years trying to put down a violent independence movement. At that point, the south of the country was Marxist and that led to the Soviet Union developing a military presence in the Port of Aden, making Yemen a significant part of the Cold War stand-off in the Middle East. In 1979, the Carter Administration sent a massive shipment of modern weaponry to pro-Western guerillas in north Yemen in what was the start of a lengthy period of internecine strife throughout the country. The Marxists were eventually removed from power and the country united but Yemen has rarely been truly united. It is comprised of a volatile mix of tribal loyalties and a mountainous terrain ideal for guerilla warfare. It is also awash with weapons and militias that have hardened fighters with battle experience in Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan.
A significant feature of Yemen is that its population is close to being evenly divided between Shiites and Sunnis. The Shiites are mainly in the north, adjoining the border with Saudi Arabia, and are supported by powerful Shiite figures in Iran and Iraq. The Saudis fear the Yemeni Shiites could become another Hezbollah and have made that point to Washington. Israel agrees and has argued that a U.S. military is required to prevent that happening.
Neocons point out that a major U.S. military base in Aden would be complemented by U.S. forces in nearby Oman and would make it easier for the West to deal with threats from Somalia, especially the pirates that operate from there into the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. The actual Port of Aden is a short distance from the Somali coast and is within striking distance of the Sudan where China has oil interests. More importantly for Israel, if it wanted to launch a major air assault on Iran, a U.S. base in Yemen would make such an attack easier to mount and would negate the need for the use of Iraqi airspace. From a neocon perspective, U.S. military engagement in Yemen would mean that if the U.S. decided to go to war with Iran it would be within a manageable striking distance. In that event, the U.S. would also have control over all shipping access to the Persian Gulf.
In 2009, the Russian leadership contemplated the possibility of the Russian navy having a base within the Port of Aden. Russia sent emissaries on a secret mission to Yemen to ask what it would take to re-energize the old Soviet link but Moscow’s overture was rebuffed because the West had already indicated to the Yemenis, as had the Saudis, that it would be unwise to make a deal with Russia since it would not offer the kind of financial commitment Yemen would get from the West. The West’s offer to Yemen, if some reports are accurate, was upwards of $1 billion in aid with military training for the Yemeni army and air force and a U.S. military presence built around Special Forces operations and the kind of hi-tech weaponry now being used to target Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan.
While the strategic value of Yemen is there for all to see, a U.S. military commitment would presents the kind of dangers the U.S. and its allies failed to anticipate before the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Yemenis are a nationalistic people like the Pashtuns who make up the Taliban. They will not take kindly to an enhanced U.S. military role in their country, which could be seen by Islamists as the genesis of a planned occupation. While Al Qaeda undoubtedly poses a threat from Yemen, there is the potential for an even greater threat from home-grown Yemeni insurgents, who fought the U.S. in Iraq and previously battled the Soviets in Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden fought the Soviets with an estimated three thousand Yemenis. Yemen has since supplied thousands of insurgents to fight U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those insurgents could quickly destabilize Yemen if they were convinced the U.S. wanted to establish a permanent military presence in their country.
By forging close links to the Yemeni president and his inner circle, the U.S. has once again allied itself with a Middle East leadership, which is unstable and highly unpredictable. The Yemeni government lacks a political consensus throughout the country and its military’s reach is limited. When the Saudis launched attacks against Yemeni Shiites last year, the country’s president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, denied any knowledge of the attacks. In 2009, he claimed his forces had apprehended an Israeli unit that was operating with a Sunni militia group. He promised to put the Israelis on trial but never made good on his promise. It would not be unusual for the Israelis to be meddling in Yemen. Israel has forged partnerships with some strange bedfellows in the region, including the Iranians when that country was at war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. The Israelis have also trained Kurds and Kurdish guerillas that have carried out operations designed to destabilize Iran.
One of the recent ironies of the new U.S. - Yemen relationship is that it follows years when Washington shunned Yemen and withdrew much needed aid because the Yemenis opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq. After the Bush White House left Yemen out in the cold, and paid little attention to it, Al Qaeda and affiliates gradually moved in and established bases.
There is some reason to believe the Yemeni leadership is exploiting the Al Qaeda threat to get large gifts of cash and weapons to consolidate its hold on the country. But, be that as it may, neocons in Washington and their friends in Tel Aviv, New Delhi, and even in London, are longing for a U.S. military footprint in Yemen. For China, such an eventuality would represent a disturbing development because it would provide the U.S. and its allies, especially India, with an expanded presence in the India Ocean which is a vital corridor for Chinese commerce. However, at the present time neocons see Iran, not China, as the priority. For them, Iran is unfinished business and Yemen could provide an ideal base from which to someday strike Iran. For the neocons, the China issue can wait.