On Yemen, Emergency UNSC Meeting After 5 Weeks & Bombings

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 21, updated -- Five weeks after the last Yemen resolution of the UN Security Council was adopted on Sunday, February 15, now on Sunday March 22 the Council will hold another emergency meeting on Yemen. Much as changed, most recently airstrikes on Hadi's headquarters in Aden and more deadly bombing of largely Houthi mosques in Sana'a.

  With less than 24 hours notice on March 21 the new emergency Security Council meeting was reported by the UN Spokesperson, Inner City Press, Lithuania, Jordan which requested the meeting, and France the Council's president for March.

  Hadi requested the meeting; some speculated he wants the "Houthi coup" language that was dropped from the February 15 resolution revived, or at least some statement protecting him in Aden.

   But with the Houthis themselves targeted, how would this play? And if a first round of sanctions didn't stop these developments, would a second round?

Update: Sources tell Inner City Press that UN envoy Jamal Benomar abruptly left Yemen, and that Hadi's goal is to get (more) UN Security Council authorization for military action against the Houthis "and Saleh." But he could already claim to be authorized for that. A Presidential Statement doesn't mean victory on the ground, though...

Update II: Seems the conclusion of the draft Presidential Statement is for the Security Council to say it reaffirms its readiness to take further measures against any party in case of non-implementation - but no reference to coup...

Update III: a question, of course, is how all this UN Security Council action relates to its P5+1 talks with Iran on the nuclear file. Seems the draft PRST would call on "all member States to refrain from external interference which seeks to foment conflict and instability and instead to support the political transition." ALL member states? Including Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Or only Iran?

  And while in February Saudi Arabia took the lead, as it were, now Qatar is poised to. But will they answer on other issues, where they are less aligned with the government(s)?

  On a cold Sunday in New York, the UN Security Council scheduled a 5 pm vote on a resolution on Yemen. Diplomats rushed in. The Gulf Cooperation Council had submitted a draft with the word "Houthi coup" in it, but the phrase did not survive.

  After the watered down resolution was adopted 15-0, Inner City Press asked Saudi Arabia's Permanent Representative about the threat of new sanctions, given how little previous sanctions on Ali Saleh and two Houthi leaders accomplished - and, does he think the Houthis are working with Saleh? (Video here and embedded below.)

  He replied that both are spoilers, they could work together directly or indirectly. The Gulf Cooperation Council will be continuing to push the Security Council, for example on the house arrest of Hadi and others.

  Jordan's Permanent Representative added that come members did not want the word coup.

 Inner City Press notes that while Hadi consented to US drone strikes, a coup would leave such consent "up in the air."

 After the diplomats left, two different Arabic language channels described what had occurred in entirely different terms: one as a "strong message," the other as "weak."  And so it goes.

  Inner City Press had asked Saudi Arabia's Permanent Representative on his way in what percent of what he'd wanted was in the final resolution. "Eighty percent," he told Inner City Press.

  Also before the Yemen vote, Malaysia's Permanent Representative said on the Ukraine draft, he had proposed that downed flight MH17 be included in the resolution and was waiting for a response. Other Ambassadors said they were working hard on it but not agreement had been reached; one said the morning of Monday February 16, a UN holiday was possible.

   While the press doors to the Security Council's third floor remains locked, from a photo booth Inner City Press witnessed the 15-0 vote on Yemen. In speeches afterward, Jordan went first, then the UK, US and Russia; then France.

  Back on February 6, after the Houthis essentially took over the presidency of Yemen, the UK put Yemen on the Security Council's agenda, under Any Other Business, Inner City Press first reported at 3:32 pm.

  At 6 pm, the Security Council's President for February Liu Jieyi of China emerged and read "Elements to the Press" to the dozen reporters assembled. Because the UN Security Council does not put "Elements to the Press" on its website, here's what was said, and what Inner City Press asked:

   “The members of the Security Council express grave concern at the announcement by the Houthis to break off talks, to dissolve parliament and to take over all of Yemen's governance institutions.

  “The members of the Security Council call in the strongest terms for all parties, in particular the Houthis, to abide by the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, the National Dialogue Conference Outcomes and the Peace and Partnership Agreement, which provide for a Yemeni-led democratic transition.

   “The members of the Security Council declare their readiness to take further steps if UN-led negotiations are not immediately resumed.

   “The members of the Security Council reaffirm their commitment to the territorial integrity, unity and sovereignty of Yemen.

  “The members of the Security Council call for the immediate release of President Hadi, Prime Minister Bahah and members of the Cabinet from house arrest. The members of the Security Council reaffirm their full support for and commitment to the work of the Special Adviser to the Secretary General on Yemen, Jamal Benomar, in support of the Yemeni transition process.”

  Inner City Press asked Ambassador Liu if this meant the Security Council wants Hadi back as president, a position he resigned. Liu said that the unanimous position of the Council is in the Press Elements.

  Would more sanctions change the Houthis' mind?

 At the February 6 noon briefing, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said that envoy Jamal Benomar had been in Saudi Arabia - where Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is headed -- but is now heading back to Yemen. The Houthis are in control, at least in the capital, another UNSC Press Statement notwithstanding.

 Back on January 23 after Yemen's president and prime minister resigned, the UN put out a summary of what its envoy Jamal Benomar is doing, mentioning talks with each and well as with the Houthis.

  What about Harak or the Southern Movement? We expect to have more on this soon. Here was the UN's note to correspondents:

"Today, 23 January, the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on Yemen, Jamal Benomar, met with President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, Prime Minister Khaled Bahah and Houthi representatives. His consistent message to all political parties is that they need to engage in inclusive consultations with each other that will produce an agreement on how to move forward from the current crisis.
 
"The Special Adviser also had meetings with members of the diplomatic community in Sana’a.  In the immediate term, he will continue to actively engage with all parties and is seeking to meet with different political groupings in the coming days."

 Maybe that last part means Harak. At the January 23 US State Department briefing, the US spokesperson said the Hadi is still the president, as far as the US is concerned. We'll see.

When the International Monetary Fund held an embargoed press briefing on January 22, after the Houthi rebels in Yemen have held the Presidential palace for days, Inner City Press asked about the impact on the IMF's program with Yemen.

  IMF Deputy Spokesperson William Murray said that recent events are "not positive from an economic standpoint," but that the IMF's first review of its program will not be until the Spring.

  Where will the Houthis be then? And Hadi? And Saleh?

   Inner City Press also submitted questions on Sri Lanka and on Ebola and debt relief. On the latter, Murray spoke of an exceptional assistance program as with Haiti, but wouldn't specify debt relief. We'll have more on this.

 On Yemen, Murray referred back to the January 21 report and briefing by Masood Ahmed -- to which Inner City Press also submitted the question. In that briefing, Ahmed said:

"we are worried about the continued difficulties in Yemen, really because Yemen is already a country with a fragile economic recovery, with a large number of people living in poverty, and with already trying to cope with different shocks that the economy has undergone, and so this makes the uncertainty, makes it both harder to deal with those shocks and also it affects confidence, so that some of the private sector activity is affected.

"Of course we as an interactive institution don't have a view on the political developments in any country, but we can look at the economic consequences, which is what I was referring to. In terms of the implications for this on the price of oil, you know the price of oil, the markets build in both up side and down side risks into that price. So there's a risk of supply disruptions. That is one of the sources that can push up oil prices with the risk premium, not just from Yemen but also people have been concerned about supply disruptions in other oil producing countries, but there's also the risk that the world economy may turn out to be slower in terms of growth or there's a risk that in fact oil production may turn out to be higher in some countries than expected. If you remember, earlier on in 2014, people were expecting oil production in Libya to be relatively low for the year. As it happened, oil production actually increased at one point to 900, 1000 barrels a day and so that was unexpected. And some people say that was one of the reasons that was helping people to reestablish equilibrium in terms of their expectations. So I think that the market is always looking at both up side and down side risks and prices."

The IMF's Middle East and Central Asia Department Regional Economic Outlook Update as released on January 21, says “Yemen is at high risk because its banks are highly exposed to government debt against the backdrop of a weak fiscal position and limited financing options.”

    Referring to the demands for fuel subsidy cuts, the IMF report says “Yemen “is planning to increase non-oil revenue collection, contain the government wage bill, and continue fuel subsidy reform.” Is that still the case? How could the IMF know?
  
  Looking wider, the IMF report says that “conflicts, terrorism, and related security disruptions continue to be a prevailing concern in the region. Although airstrikes have slowed the advance of the so-called Islamic State (ISIS), conflicts in Iraq and Syria persist, creating significant economic and political spillovers for neighboring countries (especially Jordan and Lebanon). The security situations in Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, and Yemen also remain challenging. Conflicts cast a shadow over the economic outlook for the MENAP region, not only because they disrupt economic activity; they also reduce political space for the much-needed reforms and delay the return of confidence to the MENAP region.”  

 On January 19-20, the IMF's Olivier Blanchard answered Inner City Press' question about the impact of falling oil prices on Africa by saying "Nigeria will have to adjust. I do not know at this stage whether they can adjust on their own or they might need a program from the Fund. If they did any member is welcome to come at this stage I have no information about it.”

    A Yemen-like program?

   To the IMF's World Economic Outlook Update press conference, Inner City Press had submitted this question: “Please summarize what the decline in oil prices may mean for countries in Africa, and what the IMF is prepared to do about those countries negatively impacted.”

    As the second online question taken, this question was put to Blanchard, who responded:

“Most African countries are importers and so are helped. Some countries are not and the main example is Nigeria. Nigeria will have to adjust. I do not know at this stage whether they can adjust on their own or they might need a program from the Fund. If they did any member is welcome to come at this stage I have no information about it.”

  Earlier on January 19, the UN Security Council issued a Presidential Statement about, but not funding, the fight against Boko Haram. Security Council sources leaving the meeting told Inner City Press that for funding, those in the region -- i.e. Nigeria -- should be looked to first.

  But if Nigeria may even need to apply for an IMF program, is it reasonable for the powers in the UN and it Permanent Five members of the Security Council to expect it to be entire responsible for fighting Boko Haram?

  We'll have more on this.

Footnote: while Blanchard's "main example" was Nigeria, what about Angola? What about Equatorial Guinea? To the north, what about Libya? Questions, questions...

 Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info