YEMEN IT’S STILL GOING ON?

THE ABSURD TIMES

YEMEN IT'S STILL GOING ON?

The recent attack on Syria by the Donald, designed to sidetrack a U.N. investigation into the attack as a similar investigation into the death of 200 civilians in Mosul did not turn out as we wanted, has diverted attention to that issue.  Before the strike, Hillary, speaking before a women's group complaining about how misogyny played a role in her defeat put on a horrific display of post menopausal penis envy in ranting about the need to bomb Syria and get tough with Russia.  Immediately thereafter, Trump sent 59 missiles into Syria.

However, above we have an illustration of our actions in Yemen carried out by Saudi Arabia.  Right or wrong, true or false play no role here and never have.  At one point Obama held Yemen up to be his "model" for dealing with terrorism. 

Today, the reason the war will continue, despite the starvation of "beautiful little itty bitty babies" (Trump's words on Syria) the war will continue.  The only reason is that Saudi Arabia pays a great deal of money to war munitions and equipment manufacturers in the United States.  The was is buried in our media and gets little or no attention, so here is an excellent interview with perhaps the most informed and objective source on the subject:

The U.S. is also rapidly expanding military operations in Yemen. The U.S. has reportedly launched more than 49 strikes across the country this month—according to The New York Times, that's more strikes than the U.S. has ever carried out in a single year in Yemen. While the U.S. airstrikes have been targeting suspected al-Qaeda operations in Yemen, The Wall Street Journal is reporting the U.S. is now offering even more logistical and intelligence support for the Saudi-led war against Yemen's Houthi rebels, who are accused of being linked to Iran. More than 10,000 people have been killed since the U.S.-backed, Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen began two years ago this month. Meanwhile, The New York Times is reporting today that the Trump administration has approved the resumption of sales of precision-guided munitions to Saudi Arabia. President Obama froze some of these weapons sales last year due to concern about civilian casualties in Saudi Arabia's expanding war in Yemen. We speak to Iona Craig, a journalist who was based in Sana'a from 2010 to 2015 as the Yemen correspondent for The Times of London.

---

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: We turn now to look at Yemen, where the U.S. is also rapidly expanding military operations. The U.S. has reportedly launched more than 49 strikes across the country this month—according to The New York Times, that's more strikes than the U.S. has ever carried out in a single year in Yemen. While the U.S. airstrikes have been targeting suspected al-Qaeda operations in Yemen, The Wall Street Journal is reporting the U.S. is now offering even more logistical and intelligence support for the Saudi-led war against Yemen's Houthi rebels, who are accused of being linked to Iran. More than 10,000 people have been killed since the U.S.-backed, Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen began two years ago this month. Meanwhile, The New York Times is reporting today that the Trump administration has approved the resumption of sales of precision-guided munitions to Saudi Arabia. President Obama froze some of these weapons sales last year due to concern about civilian casualties in Saudi Arabia's expanding war in Yemen.

AMY GOODMAN: This all comes as the United Nations is warning Yemen is on the brink of famine. This is U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Stephen O'Brien.

STEPHEN O'BRIEN: Well, it's not just the number of people who are food insecure, which represents about 14 million out of the 26 million or so Yemenis, which is an enormous number for any nation to have to bear; it's the fact that we have seen an increase in severe acute malnourishment, particularly in young children and in lactating mothers. We have seen a very severe deterioration in the number of patients needing dialysis services, access to oxygen, and where we need to see more antibiotics being brought in and medical facilities made available. These are seriously deteriorating.

AMY GOODMAN: To talk more about the situation in Yemen, we go to London to speak with Iona Craig, a journalist who was based in Sana'a from 2010 to '15 as the Yemen correspondent for The Times of London. She was in Yemen again last month, where she reported on January's Navy SEAL raid that left 25 civilians and one U.S. Navy SEAL dead.

Iona, welcome back to Democracy Now! Talk about the situation on the ground in Yemen right now.

IONA CRAIG: Well, as you've already mentioned, the humanitarian situation is certainly getting worse. I went to several of the areas, remote areas, where some of the internally displaced people are finding it increasingly difficult to get access to food and even water. And then, on the military front, there is a stalemate on a lot of the—on the side of the ground war, whilst also a new offensive was actually launched on the Red Sea Coast whilst I was in Yemen in January, that then pushed a lot of the civilian population into these incredibly remote areas where there are no aid agencies to support them and to provide shelter and to provide food. So, across the country, really, it doesn't matter which side of the front line you are, if you're a civilian. People are finding it increasingly difficult to both access food and to be able to afford to pay for food, because many of the government employees have not been paid for more than six, seven months now, and so that reduces people's capacity to even purchase goods, even when they are available, in areas where they're not affected by the conflict.

So, really, there's a massive sense of war weariness amongst the civilian population. People are just really desperate for this war to come to an end, obviously. But certainly, on the political side, there is no indication that is about to happen. And, in fact, the warring parties are not even willing to even engage or speak with the U.N. special envoy who is charged with trying to find a political resolution to the conflict. So, both on the military front, things are shifting slightly or have done, but certainly, on the humanitarian side, things are getting worse, with the prediction now of wheat supplies soon to run out in perhaps the coming weeks, or certainly in the next two months, that that is only going to get worse, as well.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Iona, as this humanitarian situation is worsening, the Trump administration is reportedly planning changes to the U.S. policy in Yemen. Could you tell us a little about the kinds of changes that are being considered and what their impact would be if they're put into place?

IONA CRAIG: So, one thing that appears to have already been changed, from what we've heard, is Yemen now, or parts of Yemen, anyway, being regarded as areas of active hostility. Now, that's quite a technical term, but essentially what it means is those selected areas are put on a war footing the same as Iraq and Afghanistan. So, previously, under the Obama administration, Yemen was considered an area outside of active hostility, so there were different protocols put in place to ensure the prevention of civilian casualties. And it meant that when drone strikes or airstrikes or raids were carried out, that there had to be a near certainty that there were no civilian casualties. Obviously, that didn't always work. I have spent many years covering Yemen, and that included covering incidents of mass civilian casualties under the Obama administration. But now, when that changes to put in parts of the country into areas of active hostility, that near certainty basically gets chucked out of the window, and it means that those civilian casualties are kind of allowed and only have to be proportional. So, that's obviously very concerning for the civilian population in Yemen. We've also seen more military activity, as you've already mentioned, in the form of airstrikes. So that's more military activity, less oversight, because of the way the command structure is now—appears to have been changing, as well, in the sense that the military is going to be allowed to take more decisions on that level without the kind of micromanaging the Obama administration was always accused of, as well as moving these—removing these protocols to—that were supposed to, anyway, protect civilian lives.

In addition to that, now there is talk of the U.S. wanting to become more involved on the side of the Saudi-led coalition, who have, of course, been carrying out this aerial bombing campaign against the Houthi-Saleh forces, who are predominantly in northern Yemen, and have been carrying out this aerial bombing campaign against them, and ground war, since March 2015. Now, the U.S. wants to—has been—has put in a request to become more involved, particularly in an offensive that the Emiratis, the UAE, who are part of the Saudi-led coalition, are looking to launch on the Red Sea Coast, particularly on the port of Hodeidah, which is a vital supply line for northern Yemen, which is the most densely populated part of the country, which relies heavily on that route for the import of food.

Now, the most troubling part of this request to become more involved with the Saudi-led coalition appears to be because there has been—certainly come out from the White House, from the White House spokesman—this sense of conflating the Houthi rebels, who I mentioned, with Iran. Now, the Houthis have had support from Iran, and that appears to have been increasing, with specific military assistance and weapons to the Houthis over the last nine months. But to call them an Iranian proxy or to conflate them with Iran, it now appears that the—that this almost amounts to the U.S. wanting to start a proxy war with Iran in Yemen. And, of course, that is incredibly dangerous. It's incredibly dangerous for the civilian population, who are already facing famine at the moment, and it's incredibly dangerous because we don't know what the reaction would be from Iran. That reaction may not just be in Yemen. It may be elsewhere in the region, where they're also involved in wars—for example, in Syria. And that's really an unknown quantity. The known quantity is that the civilian population in Yemen will certainly suffer as a consequence of that, if the Americans become more involved in the Saudi-led coalition's efforts in the country.

AND WHAT ABOUT THE LAST ONE? THE HYPOCRASY? 

Independent journalist Iona Craig recently traveled to the Yemeni village where the U.S. Navy SEALs conducted a raid in January that left 25 civilians and one Navy SEAL dead. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer described the raid as "absolutely a success," but Yemeni villagers who spoke to Craig painted a very different picture.

---

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: Iona Craig, I wanted to ask you about the Navy SEAL raid in Yemen in January that you've investigated, the White House warning journalists and lawmakers last month against criticizing the botched raid by U.S. commandos on a Yemeni village that left 25 civilians and one U.S. soldier dead, William Ryan Owens. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports the January 28th assault killed nine children under the age of 13, with five other children wounded. Among those critical of the raid was Arizona Republican Senator John McCain.

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: When you lose a $75 million airplane, and, more importantly, American lives are—a life is lost, and wounded, I don't believe that you can call it a success.

AMY GOODMAN: White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer lashed out at Senator McCain and journalists for criticizing President Trump's decision to order the raid.

PRESS SECRETARY SEAN SPICER: It's absolutely a success. And I think anyone who would suggest it's not a success does disservice to the life of Chief Ryan Owens. He fought knowing what was at stake in that mission. And anybody who would suggest otherwise doesn't fully appreciate how successful that mission was, what the information that they were able to retrieve was and how that will help prevent future terrorist attacks.

KRISTEN WELKER: But even Senator John McCain—

PRESS SECRETARY SEAN SPICER: I understand that. I think my statement is very clear on that, Kristen. I think anybody who undermines the success of that rage [sic] owes an apology and a disservice to the life of Chief Owens.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that is Sean Spicer. President Trump, when he addressed a joint session of Congress, brought in the widow of Ryan Owens, but Ryan Owens' father, William Owens, refused to meet with President Trump when his son's body was brought to Dover Air Base, harshly critical of this raid, saying, "Why did he have to do this now, to move so quickly in his administration?" That was one Navy SEAL, and then you have the number of civilian casualties, women and children. What did you find, Iona?

IONA CRAIG: Well, really, the civilians that I spoke to when I went to the village had exactly that same question: Why? Why did the Trump administration choose to carry out this raid? For what reasons? And what are they going to do about it now? Because not only did they put the lives of Navy SEALs at a huge amount of risk, which was highly predictable if you had even a vague understanding of the local politics in that particular area of Yemen at the time, but obviously caused mass civilian casualties. There were 26 people in that village who were killed. As you've already mentioned, many of those were women and children. That village has essentially been abandoned now, because not only—after that raid happened, not only was the entire village strafed and more than 120 livestock were killed, but the U.S. went back a month later, at the beginning of March, and bombed it for four consecutive nights, both with drone strikes and helicopter gunfire, and killed two more children and several more adults. So the last person that I spoke to who was living there, Sheikh Aziz al Ameri, he then left the village and is now living under trees several miles away.

So, the impact on the local population, who were essentially on the same side as U.S. in the civil war in Yemen at the moment—they were fighting against the Houthis, which is exactly what the U.S. has been doing over the last two years—they've not only alienated the entire local population around there, but caused to huge amount of anti-American sentiment. And now tribesmen, who were not al-Qaeda, who are not even al-Qaeda now, but were not before, but are now quite willing and wanting to fight the Americans as a result of this and a result of them killing their children and their wives.

So, I think that what was quite clear before they even went in there was that, and what actually happened was the fact that, all of the local tribesmen in that area came to defend the village when the U.S. Navy SEALs went in there. And that was because they thought the village was being raided by the people they'd been fighting for the last two-and-a-half years, which is the Houthis. They had no notion that it was Americans that were coming in to attack the village when it happened. And that was quite clearly a huge risk when the Americans went in there to carry out this raid, that that would indeed happen. It's the middle of a civil war. That village is right behind the front lines. They had been receiving rocket fire and mortar fire from their opponents in the civil war in the days and weeks before the raid. So, of course it was their assumption that their village was being stormed by the Houthi rebels, whom they've been fighting for so long. So, every man within hearing distance of gunfire came running. I spoke to a man who drove 45 minutes from his neighboring village when he got the call to come and help defend his neighbors' area. And so, I think the risk to the Navy SEALs was massive before they even went in there. It appears that there had been at least some knowledge within the village that they were in fact coming, as well. And so, for all those reasons, the Navy SEALs were being put under a huge amount of risk, and it was highly likely that somebody was going to—one of their team was going to get killed, not to mention then the fact that they inevitably got pinned down by fire, then had to call in air support and basically decimate the entire village in order to be able to extract themselves safely from that situation. And from what I saw, and talking to people, most of that was predictable before they even went in there.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Iona Craig, as you report in the piece, White House spokesperson Sean Spicer said the purpose of the raid was intelligence gathering and not specifically targeting anyone, and that initially the U.S. Central Command posted a video backing Spicer's claim, but that video was subsequently removed when it was proven that it was 10 years old.

IONA CRAIG: Yeah, I mean, two things on that front. Certainly, from what I was told and in addition to statements that appear to have come out from the military since then, they were in fact going after the leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a man called Qasim al-Raymi. I think it's extremely unlikely that they would have been carrying out such a high-risk mission in order to gather laptops, cellphones or intelligence, as they suggest. He was not in the village and, in fact, released an audio statement mocking both Trump and the raid several days later. Although there were some low-level al-Qaeda militants there in one particular house, because of the situation of how the Navy SEALs came under fire, that house was in fact bombed by an airstrike before the SEALs could even get into it, so whatever intelligence they claim to have gathered from there would have come from other buildings where there were no al-Qaeda militants present.

That video that you mentioned, that was—when it was first posted, was labeled as an AQAP—so that's al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula—video of how to make bombs, as you say, was—had turned out was 10 years old, had already been available on the internet. Well, AQAP, as it is now, didn't even exist 10 years ago, so even to label it as an AQAP video was kind of laughable, really. And if that's the best of the intelligence that came out of there, then it seems that that was a very high-risk undertaking for very little gain, if that's the best that they can show for it.

But as I mentioned, certainly, the people I spoke to on the ground, when I asked them about what houses the Navy SEALs got into or perhaps access to the dead bodies, who may have been carrying, let's say, cellphones or electrical equipment, they couldn't even clarify to me that the Navy SEALs had got inside buildings or had actually access to the dead. They couldn't say either way, because of the chaos of the situation, it being extremely dark. They obviously didn't have night vision goggles like the Navy SEALs would have. So it wasn't even clear that they had in fact got into any buildings or not. So I think that's highly disputed, that intelligence. And certainly, some of the claims being made over the last few days, that the whole laptop ban was linked to intelligence gathered from the Yemen raid, do not add up at all, from what I've seen being written in the media on that, as well.

AMY GOODMAN: Iona, we have less than a minute to go, but earlier this month Amnesty International urged Trump to block future arms sales, writing, "Arming the Saudi Arabia and Bahrain governments risks complicity with war crimes, and doing so while simultaneously banning travel to the U.S. from Yemen would be even more unconscionable," Amnesty wrote. A front-page story in The New York Times today, "Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has decided to lift all human rights conditions on a major sale of F-16 fighter jets and other arms to Bahrain in an effort to end a rift between the United States and the critical Middle East ally." If you can, very quickly, talk about the role of U.S. weapons in these conflicts?

IONA CRAIG: In Yemen, it's huge. The U.S. is the biggest exporter to Saudi Arabia, and it's big business for the U.S. But, of course, we know that the majority of civilian casualties in the war in Yemen have been caused by Saudi-led airstrikes. And the U.S. has a huge influence over this. They were—those precision-guided weapons were suspended at the end of last year, and now we're looking at a resumption of that, where the U.S. does actually have influence over Saudi Arabia—not just over Saudi Arabia, but also the continuation of this war, for the weapons that it sells to them and to the logistical support it gives to the Saudi-led coalition in the terms of refueling and in the terms of targets, as well.

So, this is—it is, obviously, worrying for those people and campaigners who have been trying to prevent the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia, but also the terms of those sales. There are indications now that those weapons may be sold under commercial terms rather than under military, which also then doesn't attach the same end use issues with them, so there isn't so much scrutiny then with the end use of those weapons in a war like Yemen. And that's also deeply concerning. So, I think now, at a stage where really the attempt should be made to de-escalate the conflict, it's—all indications are now that, in fact, the war in Yemen will be escalated by the activities of the U.S. government right now.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, one last, very quickly, Iona, that we—as we said in our introduction, there have been more airstrikes carried out since the start of 2017 than there were in all of 2016. But you've pointed out in a recent interview that there were more drone strikes in Yemen over the space of 36 hours than there were in all of 2016.

IONA CRAIG: Yes, absolutely. And even in the last 24 hours, there have been U.S. airstrikes—and not just airstrikes, there's naval bombardments, as well, which, of course, were being done under the Obama administration, but those airstrikes have been carried out in Abyan province, in Shabwah, in Hadhramaut, in Ma'rib—in the last 24 hours in Ma'rib, in Shabwah and in Abyan, and also in Al Bayda, as well, earlier on in March. So, yes, there's definitely—there's not just this surge at the beginning of March, where we saw that 36 hours of airstrikes happening very rapidly, but that's been a continuation, as well, now. And as I say, it's not just drone strikes. It's airstrikes from fighter jets, and it's also coming from the sea.

AMY GOODMAN: Iona Craig, we want to thank you for being with us, freelance journalist who was based in Sana'a for years, has continued to go back and forth reporting on what's happening there. Thanks so much for joining us.

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

TOO LONG TO TWEET

THE ABSURD TIMES

LATUFF

Every so often, there is a comment or question on twitter or even facebook that requires a response that is either too long for Twitter or needs some flash for Facebook, and this is one of those.

During a discussion, this time from Facebook (but forms of it appear on Twitter) about whether we can believe Hillary Clinton when she talks about preserving social or "entitlement" programs.  I responded that she would, but the response was that she was untrustworthy and that she could not be believed.  I was to respond.

Well, first I had agreed that she could be counted on to continue the neo-liberal activity that consists of interfering with other countries that attempt to commit the cardinal sin of thinking that their own natural resources are to be administered locally and for the benefit of themselves.  It should be well understood that the power elite in this country consider all of these resources as belonging to the U.S.  Any leader who dares think the contrary is now a terrorist sympathizer, a dictator, or otherwise evil.  It was previously easier simply to say that they were communist, but the end of the "cold war," which was much to the benefit of both the capitalist elite here and the Slavic elite around Moscow, made it necessary for us to find other things to call them.  "Oppressors" and "Dictators" seem to be the most favored currently.

In order to carry out this exploitation, it is necessary to keep the population of the United States relatively content.  This means the continuation of so-called "safety net," and other programs, as irritating as they may be.  Otherwise, the people will become unhappy and take steps to oppose the important role of government which, of course, is to further exploit labor and natural resources everywhere.

The people are well aware of some of these practices and willing to go along with them so long as they are comfortable.  Now Donald Trump represents the sort of thing that can happen when the people are unhappy.  For this reason, his supporters are portrayed as "uneducated white men," mainly.  The image of a typical Trump supported is a middle-aged man, sitting with a beer in his hand, watching a football game while waving an American flag.  This may be somewhat accurate, although it is not inclusive.  People are increasingly irritated at the way our government is handled. 

If that was the only segment of the population that was unhappy, perhaps the system could be accepted, but it does not account for the millions of people who supported Bernie Sanders who, in order to obtain permission to compete in the primaries, had to agree to support the winner (who was predetermined to be Hillary Clinton).  

Now, to a great extent, there is truth in the statement that the election is "rigged," not in the sense that Donal Trump means it, but in actuality.  The system is set up so that only a Democrat or a Republican is allowed to be elected to any office of great significance.   At one time, Ross Perot threatened to overturn this system, but that was immediately corrected by first eliminating him from the race (the means are still not clear) and second by taking the debates out of the hands of the League of Women Voters who were foolish enough to allow Mr. Perot to be on the stage.  You can be assured that the rules and regulations will be altered by the time of the next election so that a Donald Trump will never gain such a position in the future.

So, yes, Hillary will follow the dictates of the ruling elite here, escalate interference in any country that threatens to set a good example by running itself independently as did Saddam, Gaddafi, and now Assad.  Mubarak became unpopular and we allowed him to be removed, but did not stop our interference until we managed to install Sisi.  (Most people would consider him a dictator, but he is our dictator and, hence, acceptable.)

And that, of course, was too long for Twitter.

Yemen, Israel, and Syria v. Clinton

THE ABSURD TIMES

Latuff: You said it.  More of our adventures abroad and don't think Hillary will do better.  If they hate Obama so much, they will love her.

Below is a transcript on things that are at stake in this election, but for our international friends there are a few things to point out.  People in the United States really don't care or take various positions.

Obama is the peace president, believe it or not.  Now this will be difficult to believe given the facts in the transcript below, but it is true.  All along, he had to resist Hillary's more militant and aggressive attitudes while she was Secretary of State.  Now the election seems to have come down, and we do mean down, to a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. 

The idea that a female would be a more peace-loving ruler is conceived against the backgrounds of Golda Meir and Indira Ghandi.  Golda led the war of aggression against several Arab states in 1967 and Ghandi went all out against just about anybody she could find.  The U.S. finally stopped hey only when she insisted that Coca Cola reveal its secret formula.  I know that sound weird, but remember that Alliende was victim of a coup after he tried to nationalize the phone company and coca Cola.  Kissinger was the motivating force against that.

So, here we have the transcript of what we are doing in Yemen.  Donald is busy grabbing pussy and Hillary is busy defending a woman's right to her pussy, so Obama is left with the more serious business of making war on humanity.  The only problem is that Clinton will be much worse.  Trump?  It is not clear what he would do, but one can expect the same subtlety of thought and "strategery" of Bush II and his Oedipus Complex from him. 

One final note: a bill to increase weapons to Saudi Arabia has passed.  Rand Paul and a few Democrats still oppose it, but it will be implemented.  Still, the whole issue is that there are bad optics here.  I wonder what the Calculus will be?

TOPICS

·                                 Yemen

·                                 Saudi Arabia

GUESTS

NASSER ARRABYEE

Yemeni journalist based in Sana'a and founder and president of the media service company Yemen Alaan, or Yemen Now.

SARAH LEAH WHITSON

executive director of Human Rights Watch's Middle East and North Africa Division. She has made numerous trips to Yemen, including a visit this year to examine the impact of Saudi-led coalition airstrikes.

This is viewer supported news

DONATE

On Sunday, thousands of Yemenis gathered at the United Nations building in Sana'a calling for an international investigation into the U.S-backed Saudi assault on a funeral. The attack was carried out with warplanes and munitions sold to the Saudi-led coalition by the United States. The U.S. Air Force continues to provide midair refueling to Saudi warplanes. According to the U.N., more than 4,000 civilians have been killed and over 7,000 injured since the Saudi-led coalition bombing began last year. Airstrikes have reportedly caused about 60 percent of the deaths. We go to Sana'a to speak with Yemeni journalist Nasser Arrabyee and Sarah Leah Whitson of Human Rights Watch.

---

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to see if we can reach Nasser Arrabyee, the Yemeni journalist based in Sana'a, founder and president of the media service company Yemen Now. Nasser, are you with us?

NASSER ARRABYEE: Yes, yes. Thank you very much.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you tell us—you're speaking to us from the capital. Can you talk about what you understand happened, who you've spoken to? And what evidence is there of the U.S. support for the Saudi attack?

NASSER ARRABYEE: Well, no single Yemeni doubt that Saudi Arabia was not the one who did this crime at all, because it is not the first, it is not the last. Saudi Arabia has been committing war crimes since March 26, 2015. So, without doubt, it;s Saudi Arabia.

But let me tell you what is the—what is also the thing. The big criminal is Obama himself. This is how Yemenis see to the situation, because every Yemeni believe that Saudi Arabia would not have done that at all, would not have done a war in Yemen, without the approval of Obama. And it is very clear to everyone that Obama wanted to appease the Saudis after the Iranian nuclear deal. But, unfortunately, he appeased them by the Yemeni blood. And this is a big problem to the Americans. Obama is destroying the values and the principle of America now. Obama is leading the world to the law of jungle. Obama, unfortunately, is doing—is killing Yemen now, killing Yemen. No killer except Obama in the eyes of Yemenis now, because everybody knows Saudi Arabia and what it would do if there is not the approval of Obama.

AMY GOODMAN: Nasser, you tweeted this morning, "Obama Has been killing Yemen humans With Saudi hands for about 20 months now." Also, from The Intercept, they write, "Multiple bomb fragments at the scene appear to confirm the use of American-produced MK-82 guided bombs. One fragment, posted in a picture on the Facebook page of a prominent Yemeni lawyer, says 'FOR USE ON MK-82 FIN, GUIDED BOMB.'" Nasser Arrabyee?

NASSER ARRABYEE: Yes, yes. Well, let me tell you something very important. You know, the problem why—or the reason why we say Obama is killing Yemen, is killing Yemen humans, is simply because Obama or United States, the administration of the United States, is cooperating. And this is announced. This is known to everyone. But it is not only a matter of cooperating with the refuel or with the intelligence or with the logistic things. No. But it is a will. It is Obama will to support the Saudi Wahhabi regime, which means to us is Obama now is supporting the Qaeda, ISIS, because Obama is saying he's supporting the internationally recognized government, the exiled government based in Riyadh now. Obama should know—and I think he knows—that three members, at least—three members, at least, of this government are designated by Obama, by Treasury Department, as global terrorists. I can give you the names now. Three, at least, of this government in Riyadh are Qaeda, ISIS leaders. They are leading their operators here in Yemen, using the American weapons, using the Saudi money. This is what Obama is doing in Yemen. Obama is leading the Americans to the law of jungle and the world to the law of jungle. He is crazy now.

AMY GOODMAN: In June, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon removed the U.S.-backed, Saudi-led coalition from a blacklist of forces responsible for killing children. Ban later acknowledged he was coerced into doing so after the kingdom threatened to cut off funding to the U.N.

SECRETARY-GENERAL BAN KI-MOON: The report describes horrors no child should have to face. At the same time, I also had to concede the very real prospect that millions of other children would suffer grievously, if, as was suggested to me, countries would defund many U.N. programs. Children already at risk in Palestine, South Sudan, Syria, Yemen and so many other places would fall further into despair. It is unacceptable for members states to exert undue pressure.

AMY GOODMAN: That's U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Sarah Leah Whitson?

SARAH LEAH WHITSON: The fallout to U.S. and U.N. credibility from this support for Saudi Arabia and its disastrous war in Yemen has been quite severe. Not only is the U.S. implicated in the crimes that are being carried out by the Saudi coalition in Yemen, not only has the U.N.'s credibility been tarnished by basically accepting a bribe to take Saudi Arabia off of this list of shame of worst attackers on children, but now we have the U.S. government standing behind a government, the Saudi coalition, that is carrying out the exact same kind of strikes in Yemen—an attack on a funeral—that extremist groups in Iraq, ISIS, has been carrying out in Baghdad for over a year, and, again, making it very hard for people to tell the difference about who the extremists really are. Finally, the recent vote on—at the U.N. Security Council about a resolution on Aleppo was significantly stymied because the U.S. just could not maintain condemning an attack by Russians and Syrian government forces on civilians, while it's supporting, aiding and abetting very similar attacks that its partner, its number one arms client, is carrying out in Yemen.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Senator Chris Murphy, who's spoken out against the U.S. support for the Saudi-led bombing campaign in August. He was on CNN.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: There is an American imprint on every civilian life lost in Yemen. Why? Well, it's because though the Saudis are actually dropping the bombs from their planes, they couldn't do it without the United States. It's our munitions, sold to the Saudis. It's our planes that are refueling the Saudi jets. And it's our intelligence that are helping the Saudis provide their targeting. We have made a decision to go to war in Yemen against a Houthi rebel army that poses no existential threat to the United States. It's really wild to me that we're not talking more about this in the United States. The United States Congress has not debated a war authorization giving the president the power to conduct this operation in Yemen.

AMY GOODMAN: Connecticut Senator Murphy went on to say that Congress can put an end to arms sales in Saudi Arabia, again, speaking on CNN.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Congress may have a chance to weigh in, in September, because the Saudis need more bombs, and so they need the Congress to reauthorize a new sale of weapons. So Congress can step in and say enough is enough.

AMY GOODMAN: And Senator Murphy said that the perception in Yemen is that the United States is responsible for the war, not Saudi Arabia.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: If you talk to Yemenis, they will tell you that inside Yemen, this is not perceived to be a Saudi bombing campaign, this is perceived to be a U.S. bombing campaign. What's happening is that we are helping to radicalize the Yemeni population against the United states.

AMY GOODMAN: Which is exactly what Nasser Arrabyee, our guest, just said from Sana'a. So, he was talking about cutting off the weapons supply back in September. It's now October, Sarah Leah Whitson.

SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Mm-hmm. And there was a remarkable vote in the Senate, which was defeated, to suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia, but there were more votes in support for it than ever could have been imagined. So, clearly, there is a shift and a reconsideration. And, of course, most importantly, on Saturday, the State Department announced that it was going to review what it called its drastically reduced support for Saudi Arabia in the war in Yemen. So, clearly, the administration is feeling the heat.

We need an international investigation, a true, impartial investigation, to understand what is happening with these airstrikes and to hold those responsibility to account. And I think the U.S. Congress has a major role to play, not only in suspending arms sales to Saudi Arabia, but in forcing this administration to tell us exactly what sort of assistance it has been providing and what its involvement has been in every single one of the unlawful strikes that we've documented. There are answers that the U.S. government, that the National Security Council, the State Department, owes the American people as to what exactly it's doing in terms of its support for this war in Yemen. And it's only given very vague and cryptic answers.

AMY GOODMAN: Why is President Obama doing this?

SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Well, as your guest said and as the administration has itself repeatedly conceded, this war in Yemen is the price of the Iran deal. The Yemeni people are paying the bill for Saudi being very upset about the Iran deal. And I think the administration calculated that this would be a very short war, that the Houthis would be quickly dislodged, and they could befriend and win over the Saudis. What they didn't count on, and what we've seen time and again in the region, is that the war unfolds into a massive disaster and the U.S. in way over its head.

AMY GOODMAN: Nasser Arrabyee, we have 30 seconds. Your final message to the American people from Sana'a, from Yemen?

NASSER ARRABYEE: The final message is that the—we want to salute the American heroes, despite all the war crimes of Obama, because there are a lot of people who—I mean, the Americans, all the Americans, we respect them. We know that they are with us. Human Rights Watch and the senators like Chris Murphy and Rand Paul and a lot of senators, they are heroes. We respect them. We salute them. We know they are going to rescue the values and the principles of America against Obama. Obama is misled. Obama is bylined by Saudi dirty money. Saudi dirty money is destroying the principles of American values of America. They should stop Obama and every official who does not know what's happening in Yemen now.

AMY GOODMAN: Let me just ask—let me ask Sarah Leah Whitson, very quickly: Last month, the U.S. Senate approved a billion-dollar arms deal to Saudi Arabia; is there any chance this might be revoked, if there are concerns that the U.S. itself is involved with war crimes?

SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Absolutely. Even if the deal itself is not revoked, delivery can be suspended, delivery can be delayed. And we've already seen the U.S. government, for example, suspend the transfer of various weapons during the courses of various wars. So they can absolutely suspend this. And I think the U.S. government knows that, really, the time is up for this war and its support.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, so let's see some of the moderators of the debates ask the presidential candidates these questions. Sarah Leah Whitson, thanks so much for being with us, from Human Rights Watch. And, Nasser Arrabyee, thank you for joining us from Sana'a, Yemeni journalist based in Sana'a, founder and president of the media service company Yemen Now. This is Democracy Now! We'll be back in a minute.

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.