Union with War or Peaceful Disengagement?
Again, the concepts of union/disengagement have nothing to do with good/evil, beauty/ugliness or virtue/vice, like media tools of 7/7 try to put it. Many criminals, killers and bandits claim being union-defenders and they are willing to commit any crime defending it. The clear example of that Affash himself, who is still being introduced as the “Creator of the Union” by several Arab and Yemeni writers and thinkers. On the other hand, many honest and true strivers who are completely clear of any of the known authority diseases believed that the union is not the only option. Many of October revolutionaries refrained from the union of 7/7. Some of them died homeless or lived on pension that was not enough for a one-week expenses.
Union, just like disengagement, is an interest. Defending union is really defending the interests of those who advocate it. It is well-known that Ali Abdullah Saleh entered the union with a fortune less than 100 thousand US Dollars. But when was thrown away from authority, his fortune was 62 billion, and only God knows if there is more. Saleh, and his supporters (and even enemies) of 7/7 coalition, advocated the union and refused disengagement because this means they will be denied of billions of cash.
For millions in the south, disengagement is dignity, freedom and use of fortune to build an equal society based on citizenship. It means establishing law and order, creating a state of organizations and providing basic services the the union state failed to provide and even destroyed. This led citizens of the south to stick to correct this distorted situation through self-determination according to international laws recognizing that right for all peoples.
What made me discuss this issue was another discussion with some dear academics and parliament members of the north who accused me of preferring disengagement. To them I said that it is not a crime to express my opinions, overtly or covertly, I express opinions that hundreds of thousand may read, including union advocates.
We tried a peaceful union that barely lasted for three years, with all factors of explosion accumulating, and with the fourth year, the explosion occurred. This means that the during the four years of the “peaceful union” there were crises and preparations for war. After these four years, it turned, as everyone knows, into a forceful union where one party was forcing his will on the other. This is not different from the French occupation to Algeria or any other African colony, or the British occupation to the southern Yemen, with all countless flaws and crimes of occupation. For southern people, even British occupation was more merciful than the occupation of the northern “brothers” since 1990 and especially after 1994. After 25 years of union by war, the victor didn’t prove his ability to establish a state (just or unjust) and the defeated didn’t accept his defeat. This led the youth of what Ali Abdullah Saleh once called “the generation of the union” to sacrifice their lives to restore their glorious past that they didn’t live but they knew from their parents that it was more glorious that a present forced by “brothers” of 7/7.
We have only two options that we should choose from. Our choice should be for the good of both brother peoples away from love/hatred or ideological notions. It is either a union by war or a peaceful disengagement. The southern people will decide, and this will be discussed in the next article.
