• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Yemen is starving, with our help


TRIBE Member
Alex D. from TRIBE on Utility Room


TRIBE Member

Far from the watchful eye of the world’s media, war is ravaging Yemen, killing thousands of civilians, and starving and displacing millions more.

This brutal conflict should be in the spotlight, especially in countries that supply arms to Saudi Arabia, which leads the coalition accused of causing most of the civilian deaths. Countries such as Canada.

This year, the Liberal government approved $15-billion in sales of light-armoured vehicles (LAVs) to the Saudi kingdom, a sale that gave this country the dubious honour of being the second-greatest exporter of arms to the Middle East, The Globe and Mail’s Steven Chase reported in June. Earlier versions of Canadian-made LAVS seem to have been used in the war against Houthi rebels in Yemen, The Globe reported in February.

Human-rights groups protested against the sale, but otherwise there has been little public outcry.

The government’s argument for selling the combat vehicles to a country with an abysmal human-rights record boiled down to, “it creates jobs,” and “if we don’t, someone else will.” Those are lousy arguments for a country aiming to be a leader in global freedom and progress.

The Saudi-led Arab coalition’s air strikes are responsible for the majority of the 3,800 civilian deaths in Yemen in the past 18 months, according to a new report from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights released Thursday.

The Saudis’ enemies, the Shia Houthi rebels and their allies backing the deposed president Ali Abdullah Saleh, are also responsible for atrocities, possibly including the use of land mines. Cluster bombs are landing on civilian targets. Children are being recruited into militias. An entire country is running out of medication and food.

The war in Yemen is said to be a proxy war that Saudi Arabia is waging with Iran through the Houthi militia, but there’s nothing proxy about a bomb landing on a wedding celebration.

“The resilience of the Yemeni people has been stretched beyond human limits,” the UN report warns. It calls for an independent report into the civilian devastation, which may be cold comfort to the people who are being bombed in marketplaces, schools, factories and hospitals.

A ceasefire ended in early August, which has caused the destruction to increase again. Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) recently withdrew its staff from six hospitals in northern Yemen, after a devastating hospital bombing on Aug. 15 killed 19 and injured 24.

MSF said it gave the GPS co-ordinates of its facilities to the warring parties. Announcing its pullout from the region, the medical aid group said: “MSF is neither satisfied nor reassured by the Saudi-led coalition’s statement that this attack was a mistake.”

At the same time, it’s hard to know the exact scope of the destruction, considering how lethal it is for journalists to operate in Yemen. It’s extremely difficult for foreign reporters to gain access to the country, and local journalists have been killed, harassed, kidnapped and imprisoned.

John Kerry, the U.S. Secretary of State, was in Jeddah this week for “peace talks” with Saudi officials, even as his government is selling billions of dollars worth of arms to Saudi Arabia. The most recent deal, $1.15-billion (U.S.) in tanks and other arms, was approved earlier this month, though a small group of U.S. lawmakers is trying to delay the sale until Congress can study it further.

The Obama administration has approved $110-billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia in the past six years, New York University professor Mohamad Bazzi recently wrote in The Nation, part of a complicated geopolitical dance to balance interests in the region.

“The United States is complicit in this carnage,”The New York Times wrote in an editorial about the war in Yemen this week.

If the United States is the No. 1 supplier of arms to the Middle East, Canada is now No.2, according to figures compiled by the defence-industry publisherIHS Jane’s and reported in The Globe in June.

Canada is not in the same weapons-dealing class as the United States, which supplies Saudi Arabia with helicopters, missiles and arms. However, the Canadian government has diluted the language around arms-export controls to make them less sensitive to human-rights concerns and more attuned to commercial interests.

All of this should raise alarm bells, or at least spark interest in knowing more about this country’s arms-export deals. Unfortunately, the war in Yemen is grinding and complicated and far, far away. An entire population will pay the price for the world looking the other way.​


TRIBE Member
Would be nice to hear conservatives hammering the libs on the moral stink we're getting on ourselves for greedily taking saudi money while our equipment plays a role in this human disaster.
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
yep, that's exactly it, it's a far away land, no large diaspora in Canada, little media, might as well be villages burnt, raped, plundered in Africa (which has happened, multiple times, in the time the Syria thing has been going on).


TRIBE Member
speaking of which why aren't you up in arms about the "ongoing savagery" in Aleppo, Syria? you should prod president to get teary eyed again I'm sure there's a dead kid to get him to "do something". I'm sure you know about this right... it's on literally ALL the English language news outlets, plus plenty of articles you can quote/post to show how terrible that situation is.


TRIBE Member
Yemen's a bit of a forgotten war - lots of coverage of Syria.

Syria's a very unfortunate situation - and yet another example of a region falling apart despite our best attempts to do just the right thing to make things happen there the way we would like.

Lots of factors playing into that one, and lots of ways the west has there as well.

But no one really talks about Yemen, and Canadians still like to think of themselves as a "nation of peacekeepers" - and our part in the Middle East wars really goes against that.

Don't even get me started on Afghanistan.

Anyway, hope we're not going to get in a "well if you're upset by X, why aren't you talking about Y" thing, that can go on forever


TRIBE Member
how exactly do you keep peace in places like syria? or anyhot spot in africa?
especially when you are there under the banner of the un..aka...useless nation
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
how exactly do you keep peace in places like syria? or anyhot spot in africa?
especially when you are there under the banner of the un..aka...useless nation

Maybe the right answer isn't clear.

One thing that is?

We certainly haven't found the right way to make a peace, let alone keep one.

Perhaps coming to terms with the fact our ability to make people in far off places act the way we'd prefer is much less potent than we might delude ourselves into thinking. Places like Turkey, Pakistan and India will have more heft than we could ever hope to have. I wouldn't back autocracies like Saudi Arabia, who made Yemen a home for Al Qaeda and are busy making a cauldron of human misery which will no doubt send ripples of conflict through the region for generations to come.

Perhaps there is our answer - we can't directly fix these places, but we can only fix the fixers - and find a way to get them to settle their regional disputes, which is really what is fomenting conflict (all these factions have support from the Middle Powers that live in the area, places like Turkey, India, Pakistan and the Gulf States).

Even then, its probably a fool's errand. But serious diplomacy in that direction would be far more effective than hoping just the right air strike will make all our problems go away, or showing western "resolve" and "credibility" will all of a sudden cow people who hate us and hate us being there and make them do what we want. These are the fantasies of the Imperialist mindset - or myopia - take your pick.


TRIBE Member
Basically remember when Saddam Hussein was a good guy and invading "the right country" (Iran) so we were cool with it and gave em all this cash and weaponry?

The Saudi Royal Family is basically the current version of that: aggressively invading a neighbour and a good way for our arms dealers to make some cash while we look the other way at a horrific war that we convince ourselves has some kind of rationale that suits the national interest (even when its clear the overall impact is increased risk and damage to the national interest).

I think its that cold hard cash at work, making us a little more inclined to believe the story that makes it ok to participate in this shit.


TRIBE Member
America’s Proxy War in Yemen
Still being largely ignored.

Ed Krayewski|Sep. 26, 2016 12:55 pm


The Senate blocked an effort by Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Chris Murphy (D-Ct.) to nix a $1.5 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a war of choice in Yemen, where the U.S.- and Saudi-backed government was overthrown by Iranian-backed rebels in 2014. Al-Monitor described the vote (71-27 to dismiss the measure) as the Senate "in effect casting the first vote on US participation after 18 months of war in Yemen."

Even if Paul's measure had passed both houses of Congress, it's unlikely there would be enough support to override the president's veto. And the Obama administration has completed more than $100 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia so far.

In The Atlantic, Samuel Oakford and Peter Salisbury call Yemen the "graveyard of the Obama doctrine," noting U.S. involvement in the proxy war contradicted rhetoric the president deployed at the United Nations this month, where he bemoaned proxy wars as one of the factors preventing conflict resolution in the Middle East. "No external power is going to be able to force different religious communities or ethnic communities to co-exist for long," the president told a gathering of world leaders at the U.N. this month.

Yemen used to be one of Obama's vaunted success stories. Two short years ago the White House was pointing to it as a model of success in the war on terror. Who knew launching drone strikes based on information fed to the U.S. by a long-time dictator would help destabilize the country and encourage a rebellion that would ultimately be successful?

As Trevor Thrall and John Glaser argued here at Reason earlier this year, U.S. support of Saudi Arabia has enabled Saudi ruthlessness in Yemen. The proxy war, they argued, "compromises both U.S. interests and its moral standing" by expanding a power vacuum that benefits Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the initial impetus for U.S. bombing campaigns in Yemen and which opposes the Houthi rebels. A Dutch attempt to get a United Nations inquiry into human rights violations and other war crimes in Yemen was blocked at the European Union last week by the United Kingdom.


TRIBE Member

think i saw more coverage on the Naura refugees and drug dealers killed in the PH than Yemen. funny how that works.


TRIBE Member
Guess what the situation in Yemen and Syria have in common ?
War Crimes by Hillary Clinton.

Trudeau won't say sweet fuck all about it !
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
Another thing they have in common? Saudi money going to sunni crazies.

AQ is back in Yemen and sunni groups have long been under the care of Saudi cash and weapons in Syria.


TRIBE Member
No, the War on Yemen Hasn’t Advanced U.S. Interests
Posted on October 3, 2016, 11:37 AM Daniel Larison

Mansour Almarzoqi makes a preposterous argument against the effort to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia:

First, Saudi Arabia is not given enough credit for its commitment to the protection of civilians as well as for the humanitarian aid it provides to Yemen. Second, the bill neglects the strategic context that dictated the formation of the Arab coalition under Riyadh’s leadership and its intervention in Yemen. Third, it is of fundamental importance to American national security that Yemen has a strong central government and a stable as well as a functioning state structure. These are the objectives of the Arab coalition in Yemen.​

Saudi Arabia doesn’t get “credit” for a commitment to protect civilians because it has routinely bombed civilian targets with obvious disregard for the lives of noncombatants. When over a third of coalition strikes in Yemen have hit civilian targets, the Saudis and their allies don’t get “credit” for something they clearly don’t care about. Saudi humanitarian aid has been paltry and stinting, it has come with unreasonable restrictions on how it can be used, and the little that it has provided is easily outweighed by the humanitarian catastrophe that the bombing campaign and blockade have caused. The coalition has wrecked Yemen’s infrastructure, starved its people of basic necessities, and indiscriminately bombed civilian areas for a year and a half. These actions make a mockery of any claim that the coalition governments are seriously concerned about the civilian population. The Saudis are so committed to protecting civilians that they bomb schools and hospitals and take out bridges that are vitally important for delivering food to the capital. The idea that the Saudis deserve anything but scorn for their treatment of Yemen’s civilian population is a joke, and it’s regrettable that this obvious truth has to be stated after all this time.

The “strategic context” Almarzoqi refers to relies heavily on the fantasy that the coalition is combating “Iranian expansionism.” Whatever Iran may be doing elsewhere in the region, it isn’t expanding into Yemen and never was. This part of the case for the war has been a lie from the start, but it is one that supporters of the war hope will distract Americans from what the Saudis and their allies are doing. It simply isn’t true that the war is being fought to prevent an Iranian takeover of the country, and no one should take seriously any argument that includes this claim. This is the excuse that the war’s supporters use to divert attention from the folly and recklessness of the intervention. Meanwhile, the war has strengthened Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). That by itself puts the lie to the claim that the war on Yemen advances U.S. interests. Insofar as AQAP poses a threat to the U.S. and our allies, the war has directly harmed our interests.

It is doubtful that the strength of Yemen’s government could ever be “fundamental” to U.S. national security. That’s a wild and absurd exaggeration of the importance of Yemen’s internal political arrangements to our security. However, if having “a strong central government and a stable as well as a functioning state structure” are so important to the U.S., there is no question that the Saudi-led war on Yemen has badly and perhaps fatally undermined both. The intervention certainly isn’t going to produce either a strong central government or a functioning state structure. Hadi just undermined the last national institution that had survived the conflict intact when he issued a decree to move the central bank to Aden. If creating a stable and functioning state was ever the goal of the Saudi-led coalition (and I rather doubt that it was), the coalition has completely failed at a terrible cost to the people of Yemen. It is obvious that no American interests have been served by supporting this war, and it’s amazing that this still has to be said after a year and a half of senseless and unnecessary war.


TRIBE Member
Why the War on Yemen Is Ignored
Posted on October 3, 2016, 12:00 AM Daniel Larison

UN OCHA / Philippe Kropf, via Flickr
Amanda Taub tries to explain why the war on Yemen is mostly ignored and Syria’s conflict is not:

Conflicts gain sustained American attention only when they provide a compelling story line that appeals to both the public and political actors, and for reasons beyond the human toll. That often requires some combination of immediate relevance to American interests, resonance with American political debates or cultural issues, and, perhaps most of all, an emotionally engaging frame of clearly identifiable good guys and bad guys [bold mine-DL].​

Most wars — including those in South Sudan, Sri Lanka and, yes, Yemen — do not, and so go ignored. Syria is a rare exception, and for reasons beyond its severity.​

Taub is correct that most foreign conflicts don’t receive much attention in the U.S. In that sense, it isn’t surprising that coverage of a war in Yemen is so limited. In almost every other way, however, the neglect of Yemen’s conflict isn’t explained by these other factors. Is the Syrian conflict more relevant to U.S. interests than Yemen’s? Not really, but many advocates for toppling the Syrian government would like us to think so. While there are undoubtedly some great villains in Syria’s war, there aren’t “identifiable good guys,” either, despite the constant efforts of the rebels’ boosters to treat them as such. Our politicians and media choose to frame the conflict differently in one place than they do another. That framing didn’t just happen. It is the product of years of agitation to get the U.S. to take one side in the conflict. Meanwhile, Yemen’s conflict has usually been framed as a proxy Saudi-Iranian war or simply as a result of sectarian tensions, both of which are very misleading and get in the way of understanding what has happened.

Taub claims that in Yemen “[t]here is no camera-ready villain for Americans to root against.” That’s also not true. The problem is that the “camera-ready villain” in this case is the U.S.-backed coalition of client states using weapons and other assistance provided by our government. It flatters the U.S. to believe it is on the right–or at least less horrible–side in Syria, but that definitely can’t be said about our role in Yemen. When faced with the atrocious nature and disastrous effects of the Saudi-led war on Yemen that our government is enabling, it is easier to look away. It is notable that Taub’s overview of the war minimizes the extent of the U.S. role in enabling the Saudi-led campaign, which makes it seem as if the U.S. is only tangentially involved.

What makes the story of Yemen’s conflict less “compelling”? Here we have a rebellion against the established government that leads to a major foreign intervention, and that intervention then wreaks terrible devastation on the poor neighbor of some of the wealthiest states in the region. Taub never once mentions the word famine. Indeed, one would not know from this “explainer” article that the humanitarian catastrophe created by the intervention is every bit as dire as the one in Syria, and in some respects may be considered worse. “Yemen after five months looks like Syria after five years,” a Red Cross official said last year. He said that more than a year ago, and conditions have grown much worse since then. Yemen was listed as a Level 3 humanitarian crisis in the summer of 2015, which put it at the same level as the crises in Iraq and Syria. Now most of the country is close to suffering from one of the first man-made famines of the twenty-first century. That seems like it might make for a compelling story. Of course, what counts as “compelling” in our media coverage depends to a large extent on the actors involved.

There are some practical reasons why Yemen receives less attention, but they also point to why the war cries out for more coverage than it has received. Yemenis are trapped by the coalition blockade that also starves them of basic necessities, so the outside world doesn’t see the millions of displaced from their homes by the conflict and the tens of millions that desperately need food and medicine. The Saudis do their best to keep journalists from documenting what they are doing to the country, so it is difficult for anyone to get in to witness what is happening and also difficult to get back out to tell the story. The war itself makes it physically very dangerous for anyone to report on the war from the areas that are suffering the most, and the fuel shortage created by the blockade makes it hard to travel around the country in any case. Even if there were much more interest in the conflict than there is, there would be barriers to reporting on it. But there simply isn’t much interest at all.


TRIBE Member

Taub’s explanation seems weakest here:

No American politician has much incentive to call attention to this war, which would require either criticizing the United States and an American ally, or else playing up the threat from an obscure Yemeni rebel group.​

That sounds plausible enough, but plenty of politicians are willing to criticize U.S. policies and “allies” at other times, so why not here? There are also obvious political incentives for members of the opposition party to criticize the Obama administration for its involvement in the conflict. But that would require Republicans to admit that Obama isn’t abandoning the Saudis and it would force them to criticize him for enabling the reckless behavior of foreign clients. One would also think that so-called “humanitarian” interventionists would be calling attention to the famine that the Saudis and their allies are helping to create, but then they would have to hold U.S. clients to the same standards that they hold other states, and most of them never do. The contrast with outrage over Darfur that Taub draws is instructive, because the same Sudanese government that slaughtered people in Darfur is a member of the Saudi-led coalition.

There are clearly incentives for our politicians to take the Saudis’ side, and many senators did so very vocally last month. Even if they weren’t motivated by their hostility to Iran, they would be inclined to side with the weapons merchants that benefit from the arms sales to the Saudis and their allies. Backers of the Saudi-led campaign have been “playing up the threat” from the Houthis for a year and a half by falsely claiming that Iran is trying to control Yemen through them. It was just a few days ago that McCain and Corker were absurdly redrawing the map to pretend that the Houthis posed a threat to the Strait of Hormuz, which is hundreds of miles away from the closest part of Yemen. Our politicians have no problem exaggerating the danger from the Houthis and Iran’s role in the conflict. That is how they justify or ignore the coalition’s crimes in Yemen, because they are all being committed in the cause of opposing imaginary Iranian “expansionism.” So it’s not true that our politicians don’t want to exaggerate the threat on the other side of the conflict. That is what the administration and some members of Congress have been doing for eighteen months to make the Saudis’ reckless actions seem even slightly defensible.

It is a mistake to conclude, as Taub does, that “most conflicts are Yemens.” There is no other conflict today or in the recent past in which the U.S. has helped a group of wealthy client states to wreck a poor neighboring country in the name of “reassuring” them of Washington’s support. This is a war effort that the U.S. keeps going by refueling the planes that bomb Yemen, and without U.S. support and diplomatic cover it could not have continued for this long. It is also unlike most other conflicts in that the U.S. could easily withdraw the support its clients need to continue waging it. That would de-escalate the war fairly quickly. Our government makes the continuation of the Saudi-led campaign possible, and for that reason alone it ought to receive twenty times the coverage here in the U.S. that it gets now. The fact that the Saudi-led intervention is also creating a famine that threatens the lives of millions of people is another.

It’s hard not to conclude that the war on Yemen is mostly ignored because it is an embarrassment to the U.S. and its clients. Most of the people that would normally be demanding that the U.S. “do something” to resolve the conflict are indifferent to the plight of Yemenis because they buy into Saudi propaganda and consider Yemeni victims of the war to be on the “wrong” side. U.S. support for this war is a disgrace, and so is the failure to oppose it.


TRIBE Member
seems like that arms sale to Saudi is as good now as then. it's really interesting how hard it is to get news from there. and i can't believe how much these things are selling for.
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
OCTOBER 6, 2016 2:28PM EDT Dispatches
US Should Stop Making Excuses for Saudi Violations in Yemen

Despite rising outrage over the bloody civilian toll in Yemen’s war, the United States administration is showing no signs of breaking with – or attempting to check – the actions of its ally Saudi Arabia, the leader of the nine-nation coalition against the Houthi rebels.

An article in the Washington Post this week suggests the US is willing to rationalize Saudi responsibility for laws-of-war violations in the 19-month campaign – as well as attempting to minimize its own role in the conflict.

“Does an ally have to give you a blank check for everything you’re doing in a war?” a senior State Department official is quoted as saying.


Rubble from a residential house in Saada City, Yemen. An airstrike almost completely destroyed the house on May 6, 2015, killing 27 members of one family. © 2015 Ole Solvang/Human Rights Watch

© 2015 Ole Solvang/Human Rights Watch
Clearly, the answer is no. But the US has supported the Saudi-led campaign with aerial refueling and targeting assistance without criticizing Saudi Arabia and its allies for repeatedly and unlawfully bombing civilians, committing apparent war crimes. The nature of this support makes the US a party to the armed conflict, and potentially culpable in unlawful strikes.

The US also continues to sell arms to Saudi Arabia – more than $20-billion worth of military support and weapons in 2015 – despite increasing recognition that weapons may get unlawfully used.

According to the Post, US officials say that “errors of capability or competence, not of malice” led to repeated Saudi-led coalition strikes on civilian structures. But how do they know? There have been no serious investigations into allegedly unlawful attacks. Moreover, whether Saudi targeteers were malicious or simply poorly trained does not absolve the government of responsibility. Indiscriminate attacks that fail to distinguish between civilians and military objectives as well as those that cause disproportionate loss of civilian life or property are also illegal under the laws of war.

When I visited Washington this summer to share Human Rights Watch’s findings on how the coalition has repeatedly hit civilian objects, administration officials said they believed the Saudis were just bad at targeting. This belief strains credulity. Coalition airstrikes have repeatedly struck, including with precision-guided weapons, civilian structures likemedicine factories and food storage compounds, and clearly marked hospitals for which Medecins Sans Frontieres previously provided GPS coordinates. They have also repeatedly hit marketplaces during the day, when high numbers of civilians are known to be present. Lacking competence and showing insufficient regard for civilian lives or protected facilities are not mutually exclusive.

The Post article added that “military lawyers have reviewed Saudi actions and say no laws have been violated because, in their view, the civilian deaths appear to be unintentional.” But coalition pilots and operational commanders do not have to intentionally kill civilians to commit war crimes. Reckless attacks can be subject to war crimes prosecutions.

As congressional concern with Washington’s role in Yemen increases, US officials will need to provide better answers for Saudi actions, rather than making excuses or stonewalling on the US role and how US weapons have been used. Helping a longtime ally does not let one off the hook for all responsibility in the deaths of more than 4,000 civilians, nor for shipping billions of dollars of arms that are likely to be used in the coming year’s abuses.


TRIBE Member
Yemen Is Being Starved to Death
Posted on October 6, 2016, 10:16 AM Daniel Larison

Ibrahem Qasim/Flickr: air strike in Sana’a, May 2015
A CNN report on Yemen included this incisive quote from Peter Salisbury:

“Basically, policymakers in the West see the world as a giant game of Risk, and they see more value to maintaining their relationship with Saudi Arabia than getting rid of bad PR over Yemen.”

Since the war on Yemen is mostly ignored, the U.S. and Britain don’t have to worry about getting too much “bad PR.” They can enable an atrocious war and support the Saudi-led coalition as it creates famine conditions in Yemen without facing much scrutiny at all. By helping to thwart independent inquiries into war crimes committed by all sides, the U.S. and U.K. governments work to whitewash the coalition’s record and thus shield themselves from criticism for making the coalition’s crimes possible. Even so, the quote gets at something important about the cynical and disgraceful policy of backing the Saudis and their allies: the effect of the war on the people of Yemen is irrelevant to the coalition’s patrons so long as their despotic clients are satisfied.

The CNN article refers to Yemen as the “forgotten war” as many other reports have done in the past, but that’s not quite right. The war hasn’t been forgotten, since that suggests there was some point when the world was paying close attention to it. Rather, the war has been ignored as much as possible, and it is ignored as much it is now because it embarrasses the U.S. and its clients. As soon as it is brought to the attention of the governments in the West that are fueling it, the war is then either dismissed as unimportant or distorted beyond recognition as a mission of Saudi “self-defense.” When it comes to the Obama administration and the British government, the war on Yemen is the one they’d rather not talk about and would like us to forget, but the longer it goes on the more likely it is that others take notice of it.

Meanwhile, Yemen’s humanitarian catastrophe is about to get even worse:

With food ships finding it hard to get into Yemen’s ports due to a virtual blockade by the Saudi-led coalition that has backed the government during an 18-month civil war, over half the country’s 28 million people already do not have enough to eat [bold mine-DL], according to the United Nations.

Yemen’s exiled president, Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, last month ordered the central bank’s headquarters to be moved from the capital Sanaa, controlled by Houthi rebels in the north, to the southern port of Aden, which is held by the government. He also appointed a new governor, a member of his government who has said the bank has no money.

Trade sources involved in importing food to the Arab peninsula’s poorest country say this decision will leave them financially exposed and make it harder to bring in supplies [bold mine-DL].

Diplomats and aid officials believe the crisis surrounding the central bank could adversely affect ordinary Yemenis.

The Saudi-led coalition has blockaded the country with U.S. approval and support, and that blockade has deprived much of the country of essential food and medicine. They have bombed the port in Hodeidah to make it even harder for supplies to be brought into the country. They have also bombed out bridges leading to the capital, which has made it still more difficult to get food to the people living there. Then the Saudi-backed Hadi government moved the central bank in a move that everyone agrees will inflict even more harm on the civilian population. Millions of Yemenis are starving in large part because of the coalition’s actions over the last eighteen months, and our government has reliably backed those actions. This is the war effort that the U.S. and Britain have been enabling every day for the last year and a half, and there are no signs that either one is inclined to stop.


TRIBE Member
so i guess that 15 billion dollar arms sale to the Saudi's from Canada is tarnishing Canada's reputation as a ' peace keeping ' nation ?
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders