Yemen. The Houthis have a new ally: The Washington Post

Yemen: the Houthis have a new ally

By Souad Sbai

“Democracy dies in darkness”. The Washington Post seems to have plunged into the darkness invoked by the newspaper itself when Trump was elected at the White House. If the “jihad” launched against the President of the United States in the name of the freedom of press is the result of the hypocrisy typical of the international left, the Islamist drifting of the Washington Post has nothing to do with democracy. Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist tragically died in Istanbul, was made pass off as a “martyr” of freedom of expression, but with his celebrated “editorials” published by the Washington Post he was calling the Muslim Brotherhood as the only hope for democracy and freedom in Middle East, and Qatar with Al Jazeera as the only champion of free information in the Arab world. As if this was not enough, the Washington Post has turned itself into the spokesperson of the Houthi militias, those that have dragged Yemen – a country with already serious political, security and development problems – into a humanitarian catastrophe worse than the Syrian one, according to the United Nations and other organizations.
With an “editorial” aimed at spreading among millions of readers a deceptive narrative of the dynamics related to the Yemeni conflict, the Washington Post hosted Mohammed Ali Al Houthi, the head of the “Supreme Revolutionary Committee,” the body currently overseeing the occupation of the northern part of the country by the Shiite militiamen, including the main coastal towns and the capital Sana’a. The term “Supreme Revolutionary Committee” is in line with the typical jargon of the Iranian Khomeinist regime, which keeps funding and arming the Houthis to incorporate also Yemen, along with Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, into Teheran’s Islamist orbit.
Naturally, according to the “revolutionary” propaganda promoted by Al Houthi worldwide from the prestigious tribune of the Washington Post, the bombings of the Coalition led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are the “cause” of the conflict and of the humanitarian catastrophe, and not the “consequence” of the aggression led by the Iran-backed militia, which the Yemeni government and the army are fighting with the support of the Coalition in order to regain the occupied territories.
The casualties among the population are in no way due to the fact that the Houthis keep using landmines and civilians as human shields, turning homes, buildings, and public places into their military barracks and outposts. And the supply routes and the humanitarian corridors are certainly blocked by the ongoing air and maritime embargo – launched by the Coalition to prevent Teheran from handing over weapons to the Houthis -, and not by the Shiite militias which, in the territories they occupy militarily, hinder the passage of the food aid provided by the Nations United, Emirates Red Crescent, and King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief.
While the ransack of the central bank in Sana’a, which has served exclusively to fuel their war effort, has nothing to do with the collapse of the economy and the deprivation of livelihoods for the exhausted population in the areas that are waiting to be freed by the Yemeni army and the Coalition.
The censorship against the media that want to report the truth about the crisis is the one applied by Saudi Arabia, Mohammed Ali Al Houthi says, waving shamelessly the flag of Khashoggi the “martyr.” Evidently, all the documented threats, arbitrary detentions, and killings of Yemeni journalists by Al Houthi’s militias were perpetrated in the name of the freedom of press so dear to both the Washington Post and the Iranian Khomeinist regime, which inspires the Shiite militias’ methods of governance. The Washington Post must have also been very happy to watch the videos of children in schools singing hymns to the Houthis and the Khomeinist regime. They will certainly become as much peace lovers as Mohammed Ali Al Houthi himself, who is always accompanied by a machine gun in his every television appearance.
The Coalition must immediately stop the “bombings,” Al Houthi explicitly requires in his “editorial” on the Washington Post, referring to the clashes currently taking place in the port city of Hodeida. “We want peace,” and resume the negotiations within the UN framework, he points out. Yes, the same negotiations that the Houthis boycotted in September, deserting the Geneva negotiating table. Al Houthi’s request is backed by Washington Post’s “columnists” of the caliber of David Ignatius and Jackson Diehl. American friends of Khashoggi and among the most famous journalists of foreign affairs in the world, they cannot but be aware of the fact that the sudden availability of the Houthis to engage in dialogue is merely instrumental.  The Shiite militias continue to lose ground, and thus need relief and to reorganize themselves, while gaining international acclaim thanks to allies like the Washington Post.
What may have pushed the major American newspaper to such a drifting? Using Yemen to attack Saudi Arabia and consequently Trump, as it has already been done with the instrumentalization of the Khashoggi case, is a plausible explanation, but it is not enough to justify the journalistic backing offered to the Houthis’ leader and his “diplomatic” line. The November 9 “editorial” is such an indelible stain for the Washington Post that it is really difficult to believe that the newspaper may have acted without an external push driving it to do so. Perhaps, the “pecunia non olet” (money does not stink) principle can also be applied to the Washington Post’s journalists, who seem to have put themselves at the service of the schemes of the new pole of world Islamism, ideologically characterized by the Muslim Brotherhood and fed by the strongboxes of Doha’s regime, which is increasingly tied to the Iranian Khomeinist regime and to Erdogan’s regime in Turkey.


Vai a Inizio pagina