On
Yemen IDP Camp
Attacked, US
Tells ICP
Parties Should
Minimize Harm
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, March
30, updated
with video
-- Amid
continued
airstrikes in
Yemen, on
March 30 came
reports of an
airstrike on
an internally
displaced
persons camp
in Haradh.
Inner City
Press
immediately
sought
confirmation
(and comment)
from the UN,
and then from
the US State
Department.
From
the State
Department transcript:
Inner
City Press:
about
Yemen.
There’s this
report of an
IDP camp in
northern Yemen
called Haradh
that was hit,
and MSF said
that several
dozen people
were killed by
an
airstrike.
And I wanted –
last week,
Jeff Rathke
said that the
U.S. couldn’t
corroborate
casualties.
But does the
U.S. have
anything to
say about the
way in which
the campaign
is being waged
and safeguards
that should be
in
place?
And do you –
is there any –
do you see the
situation
moving closer
toward
resuming
dialogue
between
Houthis and
Hadi, or
further away?
MS.
HARF:
Well, that’s
certainly the
goal, right,
to get on a
path back to
political
dialogue.
So even
through the
military
action that
we’re
supporting,
that is the
goal. I
think it’s a
challenge at
the moment
given the
Houthis’
actions, quite
frankly, but
we’re trying.
I just saw the
report before
I got on the
phone about
the IDP camp,
so let me look
into that and
see if there’s
more we can
share. I
just don’t
know the facts
on it.
But in every
conflict,
we’ve always
been clear
that all sides
should avoid
civilian
casualties.
That’s
certainly – I
mean, it’s
important for
us.
We’ve called
on all sides
in conflicts,
including
here, to take
feasible
measures to
minimize harm
to civilians,
so that’s
obviously
important to
us. But
let me check
on the
specifics and
see if we can
anything back
to you after
the briefing.
Later on March
30, a US State
Department
official made
this response
to Inner City
Press, on background:
"We
have seen the
media reports
regarding the
attack on the
Mazraq camp
for internally
displaced
Yemenis, which
reportedly
left over 20
individuals
dead. We
cannot confirm
details of the
attack. We
offer our
condolences to
the families
of the
victims. The
loss of
civilian life
in any
conflict is
tragic.
"We
call upon all
sides in Yemen
to comply with
international
humanitarian
law, including
the obligation
to take all
feasible
measures to
minimize harm
to civilians."
Inner City
Press also
asked the
March
president of
the UN
Security
Council,
Francois
Delattre of
France, about
the Haradh IDP
camp; he said
it had not
come up in the
UN Security
Council. Yet?
Video
here.
At the March
30 UN noon
briefing,
Inner City
Press asked UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq if
the UN had any
comment on
civilian
casualties in
the Saudi-led
offensive on
Yemen, and if
Ban Ki-moon
raised the
issue at the
Arab League
summit.
Haq said Ban
had raised it.
But what has
been said
publicly by
the UN? Haq
said the UN
pulled 100
international
staffers out
of the country
on Saturday
but still has
13
internationals
and 700 local
staff and
partners
there.
Inner
City Press
asked Haq if
any of these
713 were in
the Haradh
camp. This,
Haq did not
answer.
It was UNHCR
which answered
first, via its
Spokesperson
for Asia, Babar
Baloch:
"Dear
Matthew:
Sadly, the
reports are
correct. Our
team on the
ground
confirms the
attack on Al
Mazraq area in
Hajjah that
took place
around 11.30am
local time
with
unconfirmed
reports of 15
to 20 deaths
and as many
injured. There
are two IDP
camps in the
area that host
some 1100
displaced
families. We
are not able
to confirm how
the attack
happened, but
remain
concerned for
the safety and
security of
the
displaced."
In front of
the UN
Security
Council on the
morning of
March 30,
questions were
asked of
entering
Ambassadors -
nearly all
about Boko
Haram. Inner
City Press
asked a
spokesperson
about the
airstrike on
IDPs in Yemen
but news
seemed not to
have reached
the Security
Council.
Later, a
Council
member's
spokesperson
said they've
heard of it
but do not for
now anticipate
any meeting.
Why not?
An
hour later,
still silence
from Ban
Ki-moon and
the UN Office
of the
Spokesperson.
Finally, four
minutes before
the day's noon
briefing, this
from UN
Spokesperson's
Office:
"OCHA
in Yemen says
that its local
partners
report that
airstrikes hit
one of the IDP
camps and the
surrounding
area in Hajjah
and that there
are reports of
civilian
casualties.
The United
Nations and
partners are
working to
verify this
information."
At the
highest
levels, the UN
system is in a
sense "all -
in" with the
Saudi military
coalition,
quiet on the
fact that it
includes Sudan
and on
civilian
casualties.
Back
on March 27 in
Washington
Inner City
Press asked
State
Department
spokesperson
Jeff Rathke if
the US has
been in contact
with the UN's
Jamal Benomar:
"On
Yemen, has the
U.S. had any
contact with
Jamal Benomar,
the special
advisor who’s
supposed to be
mediating?
And how do you
think that the
– what’s the
process from
bombing to
getting the
Houthis back
to the
table?
Is anyone
actually
reaching out
to them?"
Rathke said he
didn't have
such
information in
front of him.
But later a
State
Department
official told
Inner City
Press on
background:
"We
remain in
regular
contact with
UN Special
Advisor Jamal
Benomar.
We understand
that Benomar
remains
engaged with
political
representatives
from all
parties,
including the
Houthis.
While we have
not had direct
contact with
the Houthis,
we have passed
messages to
them.
"The path for
political
dialogue will
come when the
Houthis and
former regime
elements halt
their
destabilizing
military
actions and
realize that
the only
viable path
forward is
through
peaceful
negotiations."
On civilian casualties
in Sana'a,
Rathke said
"we’ve always
been clear
that in every
conflict, all
sides should
avoid civilian
casualties.
I don’t – I’m
not able to
corroborate
those reports
that you’ve
mentioned, but
clearly, we
think it’s
important to
act in a
targeted way
in any kind of
military
conflict." Here
is Amnesty
International's
report.
This will be
updated.
Inner
City Press also
asked Rathke
about the
Maldives
government
threatening
migrant
workers with
deportation
for demonstrating
about abusive
conditions,
and the 11
year sentence
imposed on
former defense
minister
Nazid. Rathke
said he may
revert with
some comments.
Here
is the State
Department's
March 13
comment on the
Maldives,
here.
And later the
State
Department
issued a "Question
Taken" about
the Maldives,
including
press freedom,
here.
On
March 26 Inner
City Press
asked Rathke
if the US
thinks former
President
Saleh could
play any role
going forward,
and for its
position on
Sudan
participating
in the "Saudi
coalition" the
US supports.
Rathke replied
about the US
Treasury
Department
sanctions
imposed on
Saleh on
November 10,
2014, and
reiterated
previous US
criticism.
From the State
Department
transcript
(video
here from
Minute 26:49)
QUESTION:
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Inner City
Press. I
wanted to know
what the U.S.
thinks of the
role of former
President
Saleh, and do
you think that
he has any
role to play
in the
negotiations
that are
trying to be
had? And
also, you said
repeatedly
that the U.S.
supports Saudi
Arabia and its
coalition
partners, and
it’s said that
Sudan is one
of the
partners and
that they’ve
offered three
air force
planes.
And I wanted
to know, would
the U.S.
support
Sudanese
participation
in bombing
Yemen?
MR.
RATHKE:
So I’ll take
the second one
first.
We are aware
that the
Government of
Sudan has
announced that
it is taking
part in the
actions
organized by
the
Saudis.
We’re not in a
position to
confirm the
details of or
the nature of
their
participation.
Again, this is
a
Saudi-organized
and Saudi-led
coalition, so
I don’t have
more to say on
that aspect.
You asked
about former
President
Saleh.
And so we have
long made
clear our
concerns about
the
obstructive
role that
former
President
Saleh plays in
Yemen.
He has
consistently
sought to
undermine
Yemen’s
political
transition.
This is widely
recognized by
the
international
community,
which, in
fact,
sanctioned
former
President
Saleh under UN
Security
Council
Resolution
2140 just a
few months
ago.
That was in
November
2014.
And the reason
was for his
obstruction of
the political
transition and
undermining
the
government.
The U.S.
Treasury
Department has
sanctioned
former
President
Saleh on
November 10th,
2014 for
engaging in
acts that
directly or
indirectly
threaten the
peace,
security, and
stability of
Yemen.
So our
position on
him and his
role, I think,
is quite
clear.
On Inner City
Press'
question on
Sudan, note
this is the
same Sudanese
air force
bombing
civilians in
Darfur,
Southern
Kordofan and
Blue Nile
states.
Inner City
Press also
asked Rathke
about the US
restricting
Cuban
diplomats to
within 25
miles of
Columbus
Circle in New
York -- Rathke
said this is
being
negotiated,
along with the
US' desire for
free movement
in Cuba -- and
if the US will
be replacing
Russ Feingold
as Special
Envoy on the
Great Lakes.
I have no
personnel
announcements,
Rathke said,
twice.
Earlier in the
day reporters
complained
about the lack
of answers
from the
International
Monetary Fund.
Rathke at
least kept
fielding
questions, and
had a
surprising
number of
if-asked
statements in
his binder.
Inner City
Press at the
International
Monetary Fund
briefing on
March 26 asked
again about
the status of
the IMF
program in
Yemen.
From the IMF
transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
you about
Yemen. I asked
online
actually a
couple of
times ago, and
you had said
it wasn’t
helpful but
there would be
a review in
the spring.
Now, with
these air
strikes by
Saudi Arabia
and Houthi’s
moving on
Aden, what is
the status of
the IMF’s
program, and
what is the
thinking, how
are you going
to review it?
MR.
MURRAY: Thanks
for that
question.
Well,
obviously, we
are watching
the rapidly
evolving
situation in
Yemen
carefully and
closely at the
moment. Given
a host of
uncertainties
surrounding
Yemen at this
moment, the
first review
under the Fund
supported
program is
postponed
until the
situation
clarifies.
When
it will
clarify? Can’t
say.
Certainly, the
review mission
is postponed.
One of our
biggest
concerns about
Yemen is the
impact on the
poorest there,
and the
economic
reverberations
of events. Way
too soon to
say what those
will be, but
we are just
going to have
to keep an eye
on the
situation.
Inner
City Press:
Has the IMF
had any kind
contact with
the Houthi’s
since they
have been in
contact --
MR.
MURRAY: I’m
not aware of
any recent
contact with
the Houthi’s,
certainly not
in recent
days. I really
don’t have any
recent
guidance on
that.
Back on
January 22,
Murray had
answered Inner
City Press
that while
events in
Yemen were not
helpful, the
review was not
until Spring.
Now it is
postponed
indefinitely.
Inner City
Press also
asked Murray
to confirm
that the IMF
may declined
to proceed
with Haiti if
it continues
to subsidize
electricity.
Murray said he
would get an
answer to the
question and
that it would
be circulated
and inserted
into the
transcript.
Watch this
site.
Three
days after the
UN Security
Council convened
on Yemen for a
rare Sunday
meeting on
March 22 and
issued only a
Presidential
Statement
against
outside
interference,
Saudi Arabia
began
airstrikes
against the
Houthis inside
Yemen, citing
Article 51 of
the UN
Charter.
At the US
State
Department
briefing on
March 25,
outgoing
spokesperson
Jen Psaki
would only
confirm that
Hadi left his
residence --
"voluntarily"
-- while at
the UN in New
York Ban
Ki-moon's
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
cautioned
against
increased
militarization
in Yemen.
Will the UN
Secretariat
criticize
Saudi Arabia
now?
On
March 24, Hadi
wrote again to
the Council
and asked for
"the Security
Council to
issue a
binding
resolution
under Chapter
VII inviting
all willing
countries who
wish to to
provide
immediate
support;" he
also cited
al-Qaeda and
Daesh.
This is not
the way Iraq
did it.
On
March 23 the
foreign
minister of
Saudi Arabia
seemed to
express this
willingness.
(On March 24,
Saudi Arabia
spoke in the
UN Budget
Committee to
say same sex
relationship
are "morally
unacceptable;"
Yemen, perhaps
because of the
pending
request, did
not vote.)
Inner City
Press on
March 23 asked
the UN's
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq:
Inner
City Press:
there have
been two
statements I
wanted to ask
if there's any
response
to. One
is by the new
Foreign
Minister of
Yemen calling
for a no-fly
zone, making
this request
presumably to
the Arab
League, and
also from the
Foreign
Minister from
Saudi Arabia
saying they'll
take whatever
necessary
measures to
curb Houthi
advance.
So I’m just
wondering,
Jamal Benomar
said there is
no military
solution and
there should
be talks, but
is there any
response by
the UN to
these two
statements?
Deputy
Spokesman
Haq:
Well, in
general, like
I said at the
start of this
briefing, Mr.
Benomar did
urge all sides
in this time
of rising
tensions and
inflammatory
rhetoric to
appreciate the
gravity of the
situation and
de-escalate by
exercising
maximum
restraint,
ceasing all
hostilities
and refraining
from
provocation
and using
violence to
achieve
political
goals.
And that
remains our
standpoint as
a whole.
Regarding a
request to the
League of Arab
States, of
course, that
will be for
them to
consider
Call it
deferring.
After the
two-hour
closed door
meeting of the
Security
Council,
during which
Permanent Five
members'
Permanent
Representatives
drifted away
one by one, no
one came out
to the UN
Television
stakeout to
speak on the
record and
apparently
little new was
said behind
closed doors.
Hours after
the UN
Security
Council
scheduled the
emergency
meeting on
Yemen, the US
announced:
"Due
to the
deteriorating
security
situation in
Yemen, the
U.S.
Government has
temporarily
relocated its
remaining
personnel out
of
Yemen.
We have
informed
President Hadi
of this step
as part of our
close
coordination
with the
Yemeni
government.
We will
continue to
engage the
Yemeni people
and the
international
community to
strongly
support
Yemen’s
political
transition.
We also
continue to
actively
monitor
terrorist
threats
emanating from
Yemen and have
capabilities
postured in
the area to
address
them. As
we have in the
past, we will
take action to
disrupt
continuing,
imminent
threats to the
United States
and our
citizens.
"There is no
military
solution to
Yemen’s
current
crisis.
We urge the
immediate
cessation of
all unilateral
and offensive
military
actions.
We join all of
the other
members of the
Security
Council in
underscoring
that President
Hadi is the
legitimate
authority in
Yemen and
re-emphasize
our support
for his
efforts to
lead Yemen
through
crisis.
We call upon
the Houthis,
former
President Ali
Abdallah
Salih, and
their allies
to stop their
violent
incitement
that threatens
President
Hadi, Yemeni
government
officials, and
innocent
civilians.
"We encourage
all Yemeni
factions to
constructively
engage in the
UN-led
political
dialogue to
achieve an
inclusive
power sharing
agreement.
No unilateral
assertion of
authority will
succeed in
Yemen.
We urge a
renewed
commitment to
a peaceful
political
transition
consistent
with the Gulf
Cooperation
Council
Initiative,
the National
Dialogue
Conference
outcomes, and
relevant
United Nations
Security
Council
resolutions.
"We are
concerned that
the well-being
of all Yemenis
now stands
threatened by
increasing
instability,
with
extremists
trying to
capitalize on
growing
volatility as
witnessed in
the
unconscionable
March 20
attacks that
killed over
130 Yemeni
men, women,
and
children.
Progress in
the political
transition
process offers
Yemen the best
hope to
address these
grave
threats.
The United
States remains
committed to
supporting all
Yemenis in
this endeavor
and to aiding
those who
continue to
strive for a
peaceful,
prosperous,
and unified
Yemen."
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 held
another
emergency
meeting on
Yemen. Much
has 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.
It was said
Hadi requested
the meeting;
some
speculated he
wants the
"Houthi coup"
language that
was dropped
from the
February 15
resolution
revived. 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: 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?
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.