• cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Your analogy falls flat because, while powerful, cartels are rarely looking to supplant state control. Instead they seek state complicity which is a different thing altogether.

    Ansar Allah on the other hand has set up its own governance structures. As I said, most of the populated regions of Yemen are governed under these structures. That’s despite a US backed campaign to bomb and starve them out over most of the last decade.

    If the US doesn’t want to recognize the sovereignty of the Ansar Allah led Yemeni government then the US concept of sovereignty is effectively meaningless.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not? The US is using an incoherent notion of sovereignty that just so happens to align with their geopolitical interests. Sorry if that’s a hard truth for you to accept.

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even if you are right, which doesn’t look like you are, then the Yemeni “government” started war with the US and other countries by attacking their ships.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean the US has basically at war with them for the better part of the last decade already. Also Ansar Allah did declare war on Israel.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think you meant Saudi Arabia. There’s nothing interesting there in Yemen for the US government. They only decided to provide a response after one of Iranian/Houthi rockets was fired at their ship.

    • n2burns@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Your analogy falls flat because while powerful cartels are rarely looking to supplant state control. Instead they seek state complicity which is a different thing altogether.

      Okay, what about IS? Did they have Sovereignty?

      If the US doesn’t want to recognize the sovereignty of the Ansar Allah led Yemeni government then the US concept of sovereignty is effectively meaningless.

      If you/anyone else thinks sovereignty is meaningless, that’s fine but it’s not what I asked about. My original question was how is this “A breach of sovereignty”? You don’t seem to be arguing why it is a breach of sovereignty.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Again that’s a terrible analogy. ISIS was an international insurgency that went so far as to explicitly reject the very concept of modern day nation states. Of course they didn’t deserve to be treated as a sovereign power.

        Conversely Ansar Allah is a domestic organization. It’s commonly referred to as the Houthi movement because it has many leaders who are Houthis, a Yemeni tribe. They rose to power after the previous Yemeni government faced a crisis of legitimacy during the Arab spring.