The internationalism of armed conflict in Yemen has presented challenges to pan-Islamic reformers. In this paper, I attend to the ethical dimensions of Muslim activism by exploring the use of hunger strikes to strengthen otherwise fractious political coalitions. Facing constant pressure from actors willing to evoke the most strident forms of religious sectarianism to explain, license and justify violence, Yemeni hunger strikers and their supporters draw attention to patient and disciplined bodily suffering in efforts to shore up solidarity. To explore the ethics of care involved in this work, I draw upon Khaled Furani’s (2016) concept of “the secular,” understood not as something opposed to, or outside of, religion but rather as a recognition of finitude whose sensory dimensions, magnified against frailties of certitude, knowledge or sovereignty, guide believers toward otherwise unavailable modes of religious worldliness. Yemenis are mobilizing new forms of protest and Islamic sociality by scheduling their activism in league with Islamic festivals, days on which, by convention, fasting is traditionally forbidden. By doing so, they signal solidarity with Muslims across the world who are seeking invest ritual convention with greater ethical as well as political import. I focus my paper on hunger strike activism that has been organized by a coalition of Sunni and Zaydi political parties, non-government organizations, intellectual groups and ordinary citizens who are opposed to foreign military intervention even as they confront Yemen’s chronic problems. I attend especially to the work of Yemeni parliamentarian `Abdallah Hashed, founder of the “May 20th Movement” in 2017. While Mr. Hashed is a representative of the southern governorate of Lahej and could have served in Yemen’s southern, Sunni-majority government, he and his supporters have allied instead with the Houthi-controlled, Zaidi-majority government in the north for the principal reason that the southern government exists only through the support of Western-backed foreign powers. Emphasizing anti-imperialism and non-violence, the May 20th Movement has sought to build national unity against the militarism and perceived capitulations of wealthy Arab Gulf neighbors. Hunger strikes are productive insofar as they have a long history among Arab socialists, especially. By employing this method of protest, activists foreground anti-imperialism without compromising their critique of state power. The ethical leverage for activists comes from decrying state-sponsored religious extremism held to justify violence and human rights abuse. By formulating their critique through religious practice, especially Islamic fasting, hunger-strikers inaugurate new possibilities for mobilizing reform across sectarian fault-lines.

Yemeni and Syria have been devastated for years since the Arab Spring in 2011. The international intervention in the two cases can be assumed the reason for media attention on wars between Saudi-led coalition and the Houthi militias in the case of Yemen and Al-assad forces and the forces of the opposition parties backing the two sides by international military intervention. These wars have drastically pushed the two countries towards social, economic and institutional collapse as the world keeps ignoring. The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the amount of coverage devoted on the Yemeni and Syrian wars by four prestigious European online English news, The Independent, France24, SWIswissinfo.ch, and NRC Handelsblad. This study also examines the news frames used in the coverage of the two cases. The second level of agenda setting was used as a theoretical guide to understand what news frames were used to report on both wars. Results indicate that Yemen war for the two years as a time frame of this study did not have an adequate coverage especially the humanitarian side of the war comparing to Syrian which gained huge international regional coverage. Conflict and consequence frames were the most prominent frames respectively in both cases. The four media rely more on presenting violence, air strikes, death, injuries caused due to the action of the opposing party. Although it is not the focus of this study, it is found that in the case of Yemen these media portrayed this conflict as a sectarian issue, framing it as a Shia-Sunni conflict or proxy war between Iran and Saudi. To sum up this study, it is without a doubt that the war in Yemen and the crimes committed by both warring sides were underreported or ignored by the media although it is on scale as serious as the conflict in Syria. Keywords: Syria war, Saudi Yemen war, framing theory, News frames.

In various shifting forms, Yemen has always been ruled using patronage networks and delegating functions of the state to non-state actors, be it tribal, religious or commercial elites. Since the establishment of modern-day borders, smuggling has become an important part of the patronage system as the state could use its limited enforcement powers to allow or disallow the involvement of particular actors in this profitable venture. As the reward was generated by the clients themselves in the form of profits from illicit trade, this method was especially suitable given the state’s limited resources. However, in order to be co-opted into the patronage network, the client needs to show control of a smuggling route or secure access to one. This paper investigates the role of land control and subsequent “ownership” of smuggling routes in the post-2011 Yemen both in the northern and southern provinces and illustrates the ways in which the fractured sovereignty in Yemen allows the continuous adjustment of the multi-faceted patronage system. Relying particularly on interviews, the changing nature of illicit trade in Yemen is analyzed and the resulting analysis shows why the fragmentation of spheres of influence and the re-shuffling of both physical and virtual smuggling routes and networks may be advantageous to power holders. By highlighting these relationships, the paper offers an explanation for the lack of progress in peace efforts and forms a contribution to the scholarly debates on illicit trade and politics of patronage.

After nearly six years of war, Yemen has experienced significant shifts in the balance of power, largely as result of the role played by regional powers. While the Houthi (Ansar Allah) rebels and Iran surface as the most common subjects of analysis, this paper presents a unique approach with focus on the emerging rivalry between the Sunni Islamist party at-Tajammu’u al-Yamani lil-I?la? (Yemeni Congregation for Reform aka al-Islah) and the Southern Transitional Council (STC) within the new balance of power. In the post-Arab Spring environment, much of the focus remains on analysis of State institutions and structures. The resilience of old or construction of new patronage networks extending from the State regime continue as a unit of analysis, but as in the case of Yemen, the State itself is nearly absent in the exercise of authority or as a monopoly on power. This presents a unique opportunity to examine the resilience of a political party, al-Islah, and the emergence of a non-State actor, the STC, through their relationship with new patrons, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, respectively. The relationship between the Yemeni parties and their Gulf patrons have directly affected both the conduct of the war and direction of the UN-led peace process. By examining the structures of the relationship between each patron and client, within the context of ‘networks of dependency’ (de Elvira et al, 2018), their priorities and prospects for longevity, this paper aims to address two questions: how have the new ‘networks of dependency’ constructed a new balance of power since July 2015? And how has this new balance affected prospects for peace in Yemen? The answers lie in priorities held by competing regional powers, Saudi Arabia and the UAE; Islah’s ambitions for dominance; and secessionist aspirations espoused by a large segment of the southern population. This paper aims for the conclusion that these new patronage networks have acted more as instruments of containment against both Islah and the STC than as facilitators for their individual ambitions. Both regional powers aim to set the pace and structure of the final solution in Yemen.