How does America deceive the world about Yemen?

International Group Tasnim News- “Attacks in Yemen “They were necessary, proportionate and appropriate to international laws.” The representative of the United States in the United Nations defended the military attacks of the United States and the United Kingdom in Yemen with these words. One of the United Nations weapons experts wrote in a note in Rashatudi that how America is deceiving the world about its role in Yemen.

According to Ritter, the above sentences are It is demonstrative that it was stated in an institution (in the UN Security Council) that did not issue authorization for military action, and therefore, it discredits any claim of legitimacy of attacks by the United States.

The United Nations Charter states two conditions under which the use of military force is allowed: one is for self-defense, which is stated in Article 51 of the Charter, and the second is by virtue of a Security Council resolution issued under Chapter Seven.

“David Cameron”, the British Foreign Minister, pointed to the authorization of the Security Council to justify the country’s role in the attacks on Yemen, claiming that the Council ” stated” that “Houthi attacks in the Red Sea must be stopped.”

Scott Ritter writes that although the Security Council issued a resolution demanding an end to Yemeni attacks on ships in the Red Sea, this resolution was not issued under Chapter 7, and therefore America and England had no right to attack Yemen.”

Both America and England have resorted to the idea of ​​self-defense to justify their attacks and have asked to imply that their attacks were under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.

For example, US President Joe Biden made a statement after the first attack. to Yemen, he claimed: “I ordered this military action because of my responsibility to protect Americans inside and outside.” The problem with this argument is that the Yemenis had not attacked the Americans, neither inside nor outside the United States. The conflicts that the Americans had resorted to before to restrain the actions of the Yemenis were also to protect non-American equipment, that is, Israeli ships or ships of countries other than the United States. Therefore, America cannot in any way argue that it was attacked by the Yemenis.

Joe Biden claimed in a part of his statement last week that these attacks “They have been done to weaken and restrain the ability of the Houthis and to prevent their further actions in the future.”

At this point, the tone of Joe Biden’s statement is as if the United States is seeking to eliminate an immediate threat to commercial maritime operations in commercial shipping lines. In order for America’s action to be in accordance with international laws, it is necessary for Washington to show that it was part of a coalition of countries that were either attacked by the Yemenis or faced an immediate threat of attack from them.

At the end of December 2023, the United States, together with some other countries, tried to form a coalition called “Operation to protect welfare” and stop Yemeni attacks on ships. Despite this, according to Scott Ritter’s argument, from that date onward, the United States undermined any argument that could make its action appear to be a collective act of self-defense and give it the color of international legitimacy.

end of message/