Address of Ali Muhammad Al Anisi, Chairman, National Security Agency and Head of the Presidential Office, Yemen

  UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am delighted at the beginning to extend my gratitude to His Majesty King Hamad Ibn Eisa Aal Khaleefa, the King of Bahrain. I also extend my gratitude to his highness the Premiere Sheikh Khaleefa Ibn Salman Aal Khaleefa for his generosity, hospitality and reception. I should also thank the IISS.

 

Attending brothers and friends,

 

The severe crises that the region has undergone in recent decades and the hazards foreseen through today’s interactions force us to find formulas and frameworks for a process that would help our peoples and countries to avoid future dangers via a joint security vision based on coordination, follow-up and implementation. This vision should spring from the peculiarity of this geographic purview in response to current challenges and in accordance with a flexible and dynamic perception grounded upon proper and continued joint consideration, execution, coordination, given that future security risks are ever-growing and that they vary and change in response to emerging factors and parameters.

 

The security problems prevalent in the past decades of the twentieth century are not the same as the security problems that have emerged since the onset of the third millennium. Consequently, these problems will not be the same potential problems, which brings forth the call for formulating a joint approach which takes into account the legacies of the past and the interactions of the present, and which is open to the horizons of the future. The security perspective should be inclusive of all the parameters that guarantee peace and stability. It should not be limited to the sheer security issue; it should address all apparent and underlying causes that produce violence, extremism and terrorism. It should adopt a mechanism that targets security in all its entirety and comprehensiveness and roots out the reasons that generate tensions conducive to a fertile and encouraging environment that nurtures threats to regional and international security and stability.

 

Inspired by this, the Republic of Yemen was one of the first countries to deal with the security portfolio via a broad, conscious and comprehensive approach. It has tackled its border problems with its neighbours in peaceful and brotherly fashions, and it has put into use stringent and effective measures to circumscribe terrorism, violence and extremism. To do so, Yemen has, via help from brothers and friends, drawn up and applied an ambitious plan for sustainable development and social stability.

 

The concept of security is rather broad and loose, as it encompasses the military, economic, political, environmental, social and cultural domains. Security is related to development. Without development, there would be little security. Poverty, backwardness, ignorance and absence of democracy constitute some of the reasons why we have to think of a clear and uncomplicated perception or conception.

 

We are confronted with a situation whereby joint or regional security characterized by respective countries’ great differences and conflicting interests, which raises concerns which ultimately pose a great challenge to the process of reconciliation between their multi and conflicting interests, especially because we have a region that is a hotbed for diverse interests and desires. All this creates a very sophisticated and multi-faceted issue that further renders the conception ambiguous as a result of its multi-faces and components. It is true that this ambiguity and sophistication, overlapped by numerous components and factors, bears on experience and rehabilitation; nonetheless, it is also true that it clarifies the genuine factors and make regional security important to all parties as long as all hope to live in peace and comfort. If this region is destined as a result of many factors to be a focus for continued tension, we all must put forward future formulas for regional security based upon respect of each country’s sovereignty and reflective of its people’s aspirations.

 

Undoubtedly, drawing up a future joint regional security formula is an added problem as regards reaching a comprehensive and determinant perception of the concept of security. Predicting the future is a process involving its own scientific and analytic approaches and means. We have to do the examination and review via mechanisms and visions that enable us to predict the current challenges and how to deal with potential phenomena and scenarios and that later enable us to find options and alternatives to render our region a peaceful and secure area.

 

The security issue, with its conception, many implications, joint dimensions and future management, causes all parties, countries and institutions, to render it a strategic priority. This is because it is a sophisticated and multi-faceted issue that defies a fair vision unless all concerned parties support and contribute to its future perceptions.

 

Generally, since we are in an open forum, we now have a few ideas to suggest and they are open for discussion and consideration.

 

Countries usually consider their security in the light of their interests and in the light of what maintains their entity, unity and sovereignty. Experience has demonstrated that countries give priority to their interests first regardless of the ideology they have and the slogans they adopt and the principles they adhere to. Maintaining their security and safety in the face of any inside or outside threat comes first here. 

 

A country in any regional entity cannot approve of a joint system of the region unless its interests and security are met. If the security and stability of the country, being one of its internal factors and components, justify its preserve of violence, then coordinating security and accepting its legitimacy on the joint level depend upon respecting the legitimacy, conciliation and satisfaction of the countries with regard to the suggested formula for the regional security that countries contribute to.

 

There is also an issue regarding which parties will be included in the security system and how to determine the geographical, economic and political parameter of the countries included within the framework of a possible formula for the joint regional security system.

 

There are changes and variables on the international level which have influenced, and will influence, any joint regional system. Therefore, the joint security system in a globalized system is different from that of a non-globalized one. The economic and technological development and the environmental, military and economic dimensions all considerations that should be taken into account.

 

To what extent can we link the success of regional security on the level of each country and the contribution to economic change, improving living conditions and the contribution to economic and human development, given that the concept of security includes the country and society? Without creating good living opportunities for individuals and communities, the causes of violence and extremism remain there.

 

There is another pressing issue in the current situation. It consists in using internal differences of some countries with a view to triggering sectarian and partisan fanaticisms and kindling political struggles. This is one of the problems increasing differences between countries and it is likely to grow more complicated in the light of the current congestion in the Iraqi scene. The Iraqi scene has become a tough examination for the future situations in some countries in the region if regional interventions continue to go this way. One of the present circumstantial characteristics is the internal polarity by regional and international powers pressurizing the regimes in this area. Dealing with the internal components of a country ultimately boomerangs, because provoking any group causes it to respond to the provocation. The Iraqi scene now forms a good and clear example that everybody fears; “Iraqization” is now equivalent to chaos in the political dictionary.

 

If any party forces its perceptions on the joint regional system without paying due respect to its regional spectrum and without maintaining the interests and the peculiarities of its countries, then the planned joint regional security system would surely fail. It is unacceptable for a party to call for security and peace in the region in as far as its interests are met regardless of the interests of the other parties.

 

The region has witnessed formulas and initiatives to maintain joint regional security, including Eisenhower project, Baghdad Pact and the central treaty. However, those formulas were limited to certain parties regardless of the entirety of the spectrum in the region. Therefore, any formula that does not take into consideration the components of the region on the bases of conciliation and approval would have the same fate.

 

There is another challenge regarding the reason for finding a joint security formula for the region. This challenge is as follows: is the suggested formula intended for drawing up short term aims with respect to combating terrorism and resisting violence and extremism? Or is it related to setting up a permanent institution for crisis management? Based on this, Yemen initially suggests a joint security project and crisis management for parties in the critical and emergent circumstances with a view to avoiding what might aggravate the situations in the region. Yemen calls for working together for international and regional security and stability for everybody’s good.

 

Thank you all.