ON his return from Yemen, Stephen O'Brien, United Nation's Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, reported to the Security Council the continuing blatant disregard of “all parties” for human life. Attacks on residential areas and civilian infrastructure have a disproportionate impact on the lives of ordinary people. Air raids and shelling on the port of Hodeida are cutting off the main arteries of life for the import of commodities: food, medicine and fuel. "I am very worried that the damage to the port of Hodeida can have a major impact on the country as a whole, worsening the humanitarian needs,” he announced. O'Brien called on all the parties to facilitate the passage of humanitarian aid and to respect the implementation of international humanitarian law. He warned that an investigation of possible violations would hold perpetrators accountable. In addition, he demanded that Saudi Arabia pay the rest of the $274 millions promised for humanitarian assistance. This is a very interesting report. It showed that the UN is really concerned about the Yemeni humanitarian crisis. But does it really care? Let's review its record so far to find out. Yemen wouldn't have been in this mess, if it weren't for UN Special Adviser on Yemen, Jamal Bin Omar. By negotiating with the Houthis and accepting their peace terms, then renegotiating and re-accepting new terms, he disregarded Security Council resolutions, UN Charter, and the very pillars of the new world order that protect democratically elected governments against military and militia coups. The Security Council resolution 2216, on April 14, 2015, under strict Chapter 7, demands that the Houthis withdraw from all areas seized during the latest conflict, relinquish arms seized from military and security institutions, cease all actions falling exclusively within the authority of the legitimate government of Yemen and fully implement previous Security Council resolutions. The ultimate international body also calls upon the Houthis to refrain from any provocations or threats to neighboring states, release the minister of defense, all political prisoners and individuals under house arrest or arbitrarily detained, and end the recruitment of children. The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, was supposed to report on the Houthis adherence to this resolution within ten days. They flagrantly refused even to acknowledge it and continued doing exactly what the resolution prohibited, and Mr. Secretary General neglected to do what was required of him. Instead, he was asking for more negotiations with the militias, giving them one ceasefire after another, which they never respected and he never reported their failure. When Aden ports and airport were under attack to prevent food and medicine shipment, the UN directed all aid to Hodeida and Sanaa, even though most of it was redirected to Houthi militias or sold in the black market for their benefit. Now, that Hodeida port is at risk of being closed because the alliance is hitting its military facilities, while Aden is open, the UN is shouting foul! Saudi Arabia and its partners are almost the only ones providing aid to Yemen, and are the only ones being criticized. It seems the UN prefers sending the aid to Houthis. Worse is the statement that both parties are responsible for the misery caused by this war. Excuse me sir! But hasn't the Security Council put the blame squarely on the Houthis and sanctioned the Arab Alliance mission to rescue Yemen from them? Instead of working on implementing the rule of law, and enforcing Security Council resolutions to hasten the end of war, the UN men are blaming the mandated rescuers as much as the criminals. In wars, collateral damage and human suffering will always be there, no matter how hard one tries to avoid it. However, it is unfair to equate the purposeful shelling of civilian areas to kill, destroy and destroy, with the careful attacks of military targets using smart bombs and missiles. Curiously, a similar campaign is being waged by the US-led international alliance on Daesh (so-called IS). Human suffering in targeted areas is even worse than in Yemen. Still, we haven't heard of UN calls for “dispute parties” to negotiate or of accusations for all parties of “disregarding international law.” We miss this “humanitarian” enthusiasm when Israel attacks Gaza or Lebanon; when Iran and its stooges in Syria and Iraq burns the land and its occupants. Why is it that whenever the Arab alliance and Yemeni resistance are making progress, coming close to liberating strategic areas, UN finds its conscience, energy and voice? But when the rebels have the upper hand, they give them — and themselves — a break? Could it be because rules differ depending on who is involved? Or is there some “super boss” who is telling his UN Secretary General when to turn a blind eye and when to keep his eyes wide open? I wonder. — Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi is a Saudi writer based in Jeddah. He can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him at Twitter:@kbatarfi
