The most serious thing a country can go through is be classified as a potential source of threat on itself, its neighbors, and the world; and be known as a country where the central authority does not control all of its territory and where terrorist groups are entrenched in several parts of it. Its landscape is used for training and for enrichment – that of extremist ideas. It is used for producing suicide bombers and providing them with bombs that are hard to be detected in airports. The most serious thing a country can go through is to be the immediate target of the doubts of investigators, if a suicide bomber blows himself up or attempts to do so; if the phone-tapping investigations intercept a mysterious call that gives the impression of an imminent explosion; if the perpetrator of the crime confesses his passage in that country, his admiration of an extremist imam in it, or his passage in one of its schools or universities. In such cases, doubts regarding the country and its citizens are heightened. They become under suspicion, or under monitoring and control. It is evident that the past year left a clear message to journalists. A tough test awaits two countries, Pakistan and Yemen, during this year that has just started. Today, I write about the second one. Its fate concerns us as Arabs and concerns both the regional and international security. Yemen's story with extremists is an old one. It has also known the phenomenon of those “returning from Afghanistan”. The explosion of the US destroyer next to its coast in 2000 was an indicator. The invasions of New York and Washington the following year revealed the participation of Yemenis in Al Qaeda. The proportion of Yemenis among the suicide bombers who blew themselves up in Iraq only reinforced this impression. The escape of 23 extremist prisoners from a Yemeni prison in 2006 gave a new indication. The “Al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula” group was born from these men, in addition to Saudi and Somali members and others who returned from Guantanamo. The Yemeni extremists held lengthy discussions and often played roles in internal conflicts. It is not a simple matter when Barack Obama declares that the Nigerian young man who tried to blow up an American airplane came from Yemen. He said: “We know that he was coming from Yemen, the country that suffers from extreme poverty and bloody rebellious movements… It seems that he joined there an Al Qaeda-related movement, and that Al Qaeda in the Arab peninsula trained him and provided him with these explosives, and directed the attack aboard that plane that was on its way to the United States.” Al Qaeda itself had announced its responsibility for the failed attempt and considered it to be in retaliation to the tough raids that targeted some of its positions in Yemen. Al Qaeda is seeking to entrench itself in Yemen for various considerations: a rough landscape that sometimes reminds us of the Afghan landscape; demographics whose nature leads to a limited presence of the state and its institutions in some areas; a number of weapons that exceeds that of inhabitants (24 million). Yemen is one of the poorest countries in the region. The unemployment rate is estimated at 30% and there is a high rate of illiteracy. Moreover, Yemen also means the Red Sea and the Bab el Mandeb Strait and the borders with Saudi Arabia. It was not surprising for Al Qaeda to use this option after the two failures it faced in Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Al Qaeda is currently taking advantage from the obligation of the Yemeni authorities to busy themselves in the confrontation with the Huthis in the North and the signs of a serious crisis with those in favor of a division in the South. The region cannot coexist with a divided Yemen with conflicts and agendas that overflow beyond its borders. The best indication of this is the attempt of the Huthis to violate the sovereignty of Saudi Arabia on its territory, which necessitated a decisive response. The Arab countries cannot avoid confronting the danger that will threaten them in case Yemen is divided. It may be said that the time for assistance has not yet elapsed. The institutions of the Yemeni state are still consistent despite the large number of tension fronts. There are two stances that expressed a deep awareness of the dangers of the Yemeni situation: the first was the affirmation made by Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al Faysal that his country is a staunch supporter of the GCC having a “decisive and strict” stance in developing Yemen and raising the standard of living in it to a level similar to that of the Arab peninsula countries. The second stance was the call addressed by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown for organizing an international conference for helping Yemen fight terror, unemployment, and poverty. It is obvious from the two stances that there is an awareness of the importance of comprehensive assistance, as saving Yemen requires something even more important than security assistance. In parallel to this assistance, the Yemeni authority demands a broad internal dialogue that would lead to a restored dialogue with the Huthis and the angry forces in the South. This would make it much easier to face the threat of terrorism. Moreover, there are indications that President Ali Abdullah Saleh is getting ready for such initiatives. It's the year of Yemen and the time to save Yemen. The coexistence of Arabs with a divided Somalia produces small wars, extremist young men, and the phenomenon of piracy. Arabs cannot coexist with a divided Yemen that would attract conflicts, export suicide bombers, and twist to the rhythm of sectarian wars.
