Yemen is the New Black! Posted by Michael Cohen

 . . . or perhaps I should say Yemen is the new 40! Or maybe it's the must have of the Spring War season. One might even say that Yemen is "The Situation." 

The bottom line is that Yemen is hot and everyone wants a piece of it!

 

Frances Townsend is so enamored with Yemen, she wants to go in and "clean it up" unless they take care of their terrorism problem! The time for polite diplomacy is over she sternly adds, proving that women can engage in the same sort of mindless and irresponsible "flag" waving that men have been engaging in for years. Susan B. Anthony would be proud. 

56% of Fox News watchers probably can't find it on a map, but no matter; they want to invade Yemen!

But over at the LA Times, Richard Fontaine and Andrew Exum have really upped the ante:

The goal of U.S. foreign policy toward Yemen should be for the country to emerge as a stable, functioning state, one that presents no sanctuary for transnational terrorist groups. U.S. policy alone can't bring this about. It can, however, attempt to mitigate the worst of the coming challenges that will plague Yemen. 

This task will not be achieved easily, quickly or inexpensively, and the use of force alone won't be sufficient. Any effective strategy must combine security assistance with mediation efforts, development, regional engagement and an effective communications approach.

I suppose it can be considered progress that Exum and Fontaine don't believe that the use of force "alone" will be sufficient. Small victories, I suppose. Now truth be told, I know next to nothing about Yemen, so I have no idea if Exum and Fontaine's overall suggestion in this article that Yemen is facing disaster is accurate.

 

But here's something I think I do know: the United States has little capacity or inclination to turn Yemen into a stable and functioning state. So no matter what our "goal" for Yemen might be, the ability of the United States to realize that aspiration is, how shall we say, limited. Indeed, Exum and Fontaine argue,

"No amount of foreign assistance will cure Yemen's deeply entrenched economic, social and political problems. Yet in light of our compelling national interest in avoiding a failed state in Yemen, the United States has reason to devote even greater resources to the effort than it does today."

Why? 

Why should we devote more resources to a country that we barely understand; that has myriad economic, social and political problems; that is run by a unaccountable and corrupt dictator; and where our interests and capabilities are quite limited. Above all, why should we devote more resources when even the authors acknowledge that it won't cure Yemen's problems? (Just for shits and giggles can you imagine the response an op-ed in the LA Times would receive if it counseled sending more American taxpayer dollars into a domestic program that had limited chance of success! Ah, but I digress!)

 

I suppose I can see the benefit in increasing security assistance to the Yemeni government in cracking down on al Qaeda cells there, but to be honest not knowing enough about Yemen's internal politics - and the potency of the AQ presence there - I'm dubious about whether such a plan is really in US interests. After all it's not al Qaeda in Yemen has demonstrated any sort of potent capabilities, except for an unusual focus on bombs placed in male groin areas.

And I do really need to point out that immersing the United States in another downtrodden Islamic state and allying ourselves with yet another corrupt Arab dictator has the potential to create unforeseen consequences and produce a backlash against an interventionist United States, which of course is what motivates our terrorist enemies in the first place?

The simple fact is that no matter how "hot" Yemen might be today, the United States does not have a Yemen problem. We have a homeland security problem and we have an intelligence sharing problem.. One might actually think that making harder for folks like Abdulmutallab to get in the country in the first place would be a more productive use of taxpayer dollars then the uncertain and strategically limited goal of turning Yemen into a stable state (with the recognition that it ain't easy to bat 1000). And each of the domestic areas I've identified has the added benefit of being a problem that we might be able to solve; as opposed to seeking out another unstable Islamic country to try and stabilize. I mean imagine if we took all the money we've spent on fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan against phantom terrorists and actually focused it on improving our homeland security?

But look, as a wise man once wrote no one ever went broke in DC suggesting that the US has fewer not more strategic interests. 

Comments

[Canada Guy]

Here's some historical context for the conflict in Yemen:

http://www.watchinghistory.com/2010/01/context-in-yemen.html

[dfsdfsdf]

mini uggHere's uggs grey cardysome historical context for the conflict in Yemenchocolate short uggs:

[john]

buy tramadol

[Hydraulic Crimping Tool]

Manufacture Hydraulic Tools, offer from hydraulic crimping tool, cable cutter, pipe bender, gear puller, hole digger and hand pumps.

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[cheap coach purses]

Yes, that's cool. The device is amazing! Waiting for your next one!

[dfdg]

Support of the Lou Zhu, Lou Zhu worked hard
Signature--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing is impossible for a willing heart.
funny games

[rado watches]

If you have PANERAI Watches , I still have my idea to achieve.

[bvlgari watches]

I am so with you FRANCK MULLER Watch

[seslisohbet]

And I do really need to point out that immersing the United States in another downtrodden Islamic state and allying ourselves with yet another corrupt Arab dictator has the potential to create unforeseen consequences and produce a backlash against an interventionist United States, which of course is what motivates our terrorist enemies in the first place?