The blockade imposed on Qatar is unfair and breaks the bonds of brotherhood and neighbor, and violates international covenants and treaties, said the human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Tawakkol Karman.Karman

stressed that the boycott came as a punishment on Qatar for its support for the Arab spring. 

In an interview carried out by the Qatari Al Sharq newspaper, she reaffirmed that the role of Qatar in supporting the Arab spring and its issues in general was essential and decisive, pointing out that Qatar played a pivotal role that no one denies.

The 13-point list recently presented by the three blockading Gulf countries, in Karman’s view, is nothing but a desperate attempt to justify their unfair measures against Qatar. 

She also drew attention to the boycotting countries’ insistence on being preoccupied with tiny projects, while the Iranian threat is only a stone’s throw from their capitals and thrones.

Mrs. Karman emphasized that Abu Dhabi has taken over the decision making among the Saudi-led coalition, and directed its operations and policies in a way that led to the failure to achieve the goals of ending the coup and restoring the control of legitimacy.

As for accusations concerning Qatar’s support for the coup in Yemen, the Nobel laureate said: "Qatar does not need anyone to defend it against such ridiculous charge. Whoever follows media outlets of the putschists in Yemen (Houthis and forces loyal to Saleh) will find most of them dedicated to attacking Qatar and Al Jazeera.

 

As a global human rights activist, what is your view on Qatar's siege?

Undoubtedly, it is an unfair siege that breaks the bonds of brotherhood and neighbor, and violates international covenants and treaties. For this reason, these measures have been met with an unexpected rejection at local, regional and global level and before that with sympathy of the peoples whose countries are behind this blockade. This led to these countries threatening anyone publishing expressions of sympathy towards Qatar with up to 15 years in prison; even if that comes as a tweet on Twitter, a post on Facebook or an opinion shared on WhatsApp groups. Such response indicates the weakness of the logic of the countries, which have taken a decision to boycott and blockade Qatar.

 

Qatar’s support for Yemen’s revolution

As one of the leading figures behind the popular uprising, how do you evaluate Qatar’s role in the revolution in Yemen? 

The role of Qatar in supporting the Arab Spring revolutions and its issues in general was essential and decisive. It was a pivotal role that no one denies, and I believe that Qatar is being punished today for this role, but not for other reason.

It is very clear to me and to many others that the real reason behind the siege is in retaliation against Qatar for its role in supporting the Arab spring, and I think this is a very bad behavior that would be to the benefit of nobody in the Gulf or the Arab world.

 

So, Qatar is punished because of its support for the Arab spring revolution, including the Yemeni revolution? 

Yes, if not, for what then? Unfortunately, they do this even after they saw by themselves the disastrous consequences of Egypt’s coup and the replacement of the Arab spring with the Iranian spring. The Iranian project is only a stone's throw from their capitals and their thrones, while they insist on wasting everything in tiny projects.

 

What do you mean by “tiny projects”?

The imposition of a blockade on Qatar can only be described as a small project.

 

But how do you view the decision itself?

What I can say here is that the decision to impose the siege on Qatar lacks strategic vision and is dominated by arrogance and political adolescence of Abu Dhabi’s rulers who unfortunately implicated the brothers in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in their blockade. 

 

Blockade was already prepare

 Nearly a month after the siege, the countries of the blockade gave a list of 13 demands to Qatar. What do you think of these demands?

I think that the countries of the blockade have no real demands. Demands should have been submitted in advance. The timing makes no doubt that their step is only a miserable attempt to justify the siege.

All the measures against Qatar were taken only hours after Doha denied a fabricated statement attributed to the Emir of Qatar, and followed by a smear campaign spearheaded by the blockading’s media. It was very obvious that the campaign was orchestrated in advance and its lunch was set to coincide with the publication of Emir’s fabricated statements, according to which the boycott and siege were declared, ending up listing 13 demands described by the world as provocative, unenforceable and impeded. These demands have been denounced by human rights organizations as well as by activists and politicians everywhere.

 

Houthi attack on Qatar

After the coup against legitimacy in Yemen, was Qatar’s role in favor of the coup and Houthis as claimed by the media of the blockading countries or of the Yemeni people and the popular resistance?

Qatar needs nobody to defend it against such ridiculous charge. You could go back and take a look at the media of the coup in Yemen and you would find most of them attacking Qatar and Al Jazeera. Following the blockade, the blockading parties started to make countless allegations against Qatar to justify their arbitrary measures. For example, they accused Qatar of delaying the restoration of the Yemeni state and blamed it for the failure of Saudi-led military coalition whose decisions are monopolized by Saudi Arabia and UAE, which have excluded Qatar from taking part in any decision. Nevertheless, their media enthusiastically promote that Qatar has conspired with the coup and is the main reason behind the coalition’s failure in Yemen.

 

Broad support

Does Qatar’s position have the support of the Yemeni street?

Qatar is widely supported by Yemen’s popular resistance and the youth of the revolution, but Qatar's military participation was limited, compared to the political and media opposition to the coup, which was the strongest, broadest and most influential ever. Qatar has made sure that its participation does not clash with Saudi Arabia, despite the deliberate and unacceptable exclusion of Qatar.

Despite major mistakes and significant deficiency of the coalition, the effective media and political performance of Qatar has always avoided all this and gone against the coup with impartiality and integrity.

 

Quite frankly, has Qatar ever sided with a Yemeni party against others?

Talking about “impartiality” at very critical moments makes me laugh, as some of the blockading countries completely sided with the counter-revolution in Yemen, and supported and gave it the green light to carry out the coup against legitimacy. However, they have not been punished or boycotted. A new page, instead, was opened by Qatar and the forces of the revolution to achieve the common goals by confronting the common existential challenges we realized in Iran’s expansion project whose owners had just finished saying that Sana’a is the fourth capital Sana'a under the Iranian control. But later, it turned out that we, but not Iran, are the existential challenge in the eyes of Saudi Arabia and UAE.

 

But some say that Qatar supports the Muslim Brotherhood in Yemen?

Unfortunately, they say that Qatar sided with some of the components and parties in Yemen, but such allegation comes in the rush to search for unjust justifications for the blockade, and soon they revealed that they revenge from Qatar because it sided with the revolutions of the Arab spring, and with the demands of the protestors. Couldn’t Gulf governments coexist with the Arab spring countries without the need to collide with them? I say Qatar has done so in anticipation of the future, but not as an aggressive policy against certain regimes in the region.

 

Miserable role

How do you describe the role of the UAE in Yemen?

It is a miserable role before, during and after the coup. Prior to the coup, the deposed president’s son and the sons of his brothers chose Abu Dhabi as a place for their residence and and their stolen money, as well as as a base for activities aimed to undermining the transitional process in Yemen. The coup’s forces received support and were assured to invade Sana'a with the aim of uprooting the Muslim Brotherhood.

After the coup took place and the Arab coalition launched its campaign, Abu Dhabi dominated its decisions and took over its operations and policies in a manner that led to the failure to achieve the goal of ending the coup and restoring the legitimacy in accordance with the Gulf initiative, the outcomes of the national dialogue, and UN resolutions.

 

What do you think about the decision of the Yemeni government to sever relations with Qatar? Would it have been better for the government to adopt a neutral position?

Unquestionably, it was a very bad decision. The president and his government should have maintained the same distance from all parties and shouldn’t have copied the position of the blockading countries. But it is clear that President Hadi and his government have been under considerable pressure from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to make the boycott decision, especially since they are in Riyadh. In any case, the majority of Yemenis feel sympathy for Qatar, and condemn the aggression and the unfair siege.

 

If you are asked a message to Qataris, what would it be?

The blockade mainly targets the people of Qatar, otherwise what does it mean to prevent the importation of milk, vegetables and foodstuffs? What does mean to close airspaces to flights from an to Qatar?

But it is certain that this misconduct is rejected by the GCC peoples, which show great sympathy for Qatar, had it not been for attempts to threaten anyone publishing expressions of sympathy towards Qatar with up to 15 years in prison and being subjected to a large fine.

I’m saying to the Qatari people: the world and peoples worldwide are with you. The conspiracy has failed and this unjust siege will inevitably fall.

 

The role of the UAE in Yemen

Regarding the situation in Yemen, does the UAE have a role that conflicts with the legitimate authority represented by President Hadi?

70% of the territory of Yemen is no longer under the control of the coup, while 30% with more than half of the population is still under the control of the coup, including the capital Sana'a and the port of Hodeidah. The liberated areas are not under the control of the legitimate authority represented by President Hadi and his government but under the control of military and security units and officials owing allegiance not to the legitimate president, but to parties in the alliance, namely the UAE. If a collision occurs between president's will and the will of the UAE, they automatically follow the orders of the UAE, ignoring the president's instructions.

 

Do you mean that the liberated areas have never been under the legitimate authority?

Yes, except, of course, the provinces of Marib, Al-Jawf and Taiz.

 

Failure of Saudi-led coalition in backing legitimacy

What you are saying makes the reader doubt about the coalition's support for legitimacy?

Of course, the Saudi-led military alliance does not support the legitimacy as it should, as evidenced by failure of two top UAE allies, namely the governor of Aden and commander of the security belt in Aden, to comply with the order of dismiss issued by the legitimate Hadi, openly declaring their rebellion against the internationally recognized legitimacy and announcing a transitional council led by them to run the south. To make matters worse, Abu Dhabi also expressed its refusal to recognize the legitimate president’s order.

 

Yemen’s legitimate President targeted by UAE

Could you please give examples of how the UAE controls the decision making in Yemen and poses a threat to President Hadi's authority?

In Hadhramaut, for example, a pro-UAE military force known as Hadrami elite forces was established. This military force does not recognize the legitimacy as an authority and a federal project. The governor of Hadhramaut was imposed by Abu Dhabi, which dictates even what positions he should take on the legitimate authority and its project.

A few months ago, UAE-controlled security force controlling the Aden airport prevented the president's plane from landing at Aden airport. The president then had to land on Socotra Island. When the president ordered to change the airport security guards, the order was rejected with the support of the UAE. The presidential protection brigades found themselves forced to intervene in the implementation of the President's instruction, but they were surprisingly bombed by Emirati Apache helicopters.

President Hadi ordered to change the governors of Hadhramaut, Shabwa and Socotra a few days ago. In return, the Abu Dhabi-backed southern political council issued a statement rejecting the the order. Months ago, some commanders of the presidential protection brigades accompanied President Hadi on an overseas visit. Later, however, Emirati forces in Aden preventing them from returning to the city and forced them to go to Riyadh where they are still so far.

 

Why are they doing all this?

President Hadi wants to be a bit independent, but Abu Dhabi wants him to be the opposite.

 

UAE purposes in Yemen

The UAE seeks to replace the control of the coup with another one that is also rebels against legitimacy, and against its powers and federal project.

The Aden airport, the port of Aden and the airport and the port of Mukalla are all vital and important facilities, but they are not under the authority of the President and his government.

 

Do you want to say that the UAE does this as a systematic approach and a deliberate policy?

Of course, this is evidenced by the reality, and nothing tells otherwise. Every time we hope that the Emirati brothers may stop acting contrary to the main goal according to which Saudi-led military coalition intervened in Yemen, they unfortunately disappoint our hopes and indulge in committing more excesses.

As the UAE forces planned to liberate the port of Mocha in preparation for the liberation of Hodeidah, they forced the president to appoint a governor for Hodeidah. As usual, the new governor was chosen so carefully that he owes allegiance to it rather than to the president. To liberate Mocha and Hodeidah, the UAE laid down some conditions, including non-participation of any Qatari or Saudi military units or any troops loyal to President Hadi in this military operation. Indeed, only pro-UAE militias backed by Emirati forces took over the mission.

 

Who is responsible for failures?

The responsibility primarily lies with the one enjoying the widest powers. Here, the UAE occupies the number-one ranking, as it has had absolute powers. It is the one who monopolizes the issuance of decisions, followed by Saudi Arabia, which supports only the legitimacy, but it is blamed for complying with the will and agenda of the UAE. 

 

What feel do Yemenis have about such situation?

The sense of disappointment has prevailed since early, and keeps growing day by day as a result of such actions. Most Yemenis welcomed the military intervention by the Saudi-led Arab coalition, in the hope that it helps them regain their state. This intervention was hoped to be accompanied by economic wellbeing. This is what many people were betting on. It was said that our Gulf neighbors finally recognized the importance of Yemen and the importance of partnership with the Yemeni people for their security and stability.

Unfortunately, the border remained closed to employment, asylum and immigration. Relief efforts remained limited and very few. Public sector employees have not been paid for months, even the logistical support provided to members of the national army and the popular resistance, who have been fighting alongside the coalition, is being curtailed in an unintelligible way; as if the coalition did not want any victory or the coup to be thwarted.

 

According to what you have mentioned, one could understand that resolving the Yemeni issue requires a long time?  

Yes, but before everything we need to define the Yemeni issue so that we could explain the reasons for not resolving it. The Yemeni issue could be summarized as follows: 1) A coup, which undermined the legitimate transitional authority represented by President Hadi and his government; 2) A multi-regional federal project stipulated in the draft constitution.

 

This is the Yemeni issue, but when can we say that it has been settled?

This would be done when President Hadi and his government replaced the putschists by extending the control over all seized areas and the entire national territory so that all civil, military and security institutions are under the control of the legitimate authority. Once this has been done, people go to a referendum on the draft constitution, which was disrupted by the coup. After that, various elections should be held based on the new constitution. Only then could we say that the resolution of the Yemeni issue has been made. Based on this criterion only, we could say that any measures or steps taken by the coalition are legitimate and for the restoration of legitimate authority.