Should we refrain from inciting against what remains of the infrastructure?

Those who have not been satisfied by the wars that have devastated the country over the past decades continue to call for even deadlier wars than those we have already endured. There is an urgent need for more wars, which does not come from those who have tasted the bitterness of war and witnessed all its tragedies and consequences on the country's infrastructure and facilities, the displacement of women and children from their homes, and the massive migration of people from one area to another, from plains to mountains, and from villages to urban centers. Some rode the wave only to be swallowed by it, while others fled from a war in their homeland, which they do not understand the reason for its persistent resurgence, only to be consumed by another war in distant corners of the world.

It is unfortunate that those hungry for more wars are the ones who held power, money, and weapons, after many bravado statements fell one after the other like castles in a cheap dramatic scene. The Yemeni ambassador to Washington, Mohamed Al-Hadrami, wants a "war that ends all wars." How many wars have you engaged in? Haven't you had enough? From the wars of the two Yemens to the Great Assassination on October 11, 1977. Some have continued to search for a new war to maximize benefits; Al-Hadrami is not the only one among these advocates; there is a wide queue.

They did not question who would fight the war that would engulf "all wars" and what the cost would be. However, we have no price to pay for such a war. In Iraq, the price was provided, and the surplus is evident today. In Libya, the chasm of war consumes the people, and Gaddafi remains when the country faces options where he appears preferable. Do you believe you have an advantage over others?

Wars have not ceased to ignite; it was expected that unity would end all manifestations of war, its barons, and its tools. Unfortunately, it has only intensified their appetites. Why do you not stop calling for war? We need a trivial slogan to ignite a war that won't end until we prepare the ground for a new one.

War advocates, by any means, do not want to be touched by it, yet they are willing to burn all the resources of the country to sustain their calculations and return to power, even if it means following the paths of Chalabi in Iraq or Karzai in Afghanistan. We do not learn from history. Chalabi is gone, followed by Karzai, and Iraq and Afghanistan have returned to the American-made quagmire.

"The Port of Hodeidah is the main base from which the Houthis launch their attacks in the Red Sea," said Al-Hadrami. The electricity stations destroyed by "Khalifat" politics are also unnecessary to us; every time, power has been the priority, even if nothing remains of the people but herds of the hungry and farms of the dead.

Let us remind you all that the infrastructure—or what remains of it, or even its ruins and remnants—is not owned by any of the warring factions. None of them built it from their own resources, nor even from state resources, which have remained a project for plunder by anyone who jumped into the constructed palace. Everything built over the past decades and skillfully destroyed was constructed in our country by other nations such as China, the Soviet Union, Kuwait, Japan, and the World Bank.

What is strange about all that is happening is that many have aligned themselves with the Israeli narrative that describes the Yemeni infrastructure, or what remains of it after the coalition destroyed a large part of it, as terrorist targets belonging to the Houthis. This did not stop with Al-Hadrami alone but extended to others, and many media outlets adopted it as an absolute truth.

I can understand why some Gulf and foreign media outlets have embraced this characterization, such as Al-Sharq Al-Awsat newspaper and its website, which reported from a Zionist military source: “In a large-scale air operation on Sunday, dozens of aircraft belonging to the Air Force, including fighter jets, refueling planes, and reconnaissance aircraft, attacked military targets of the terrorist Houthi regime in the areas of Ras Isa and Hodeidah in Yemen.” They did not accompany this statement with the mocking or skeptical phrases they usually include in other reports, even though the victims who fell were mostly engineers and workers, not Houthi members. Even if some of them were Houthis, does this justify such classification and destruction?

Swissinfo published a prominent article titled "Israeli Aircraft Bomb Houthi Targets in Yemen After Attack on Tel Aviv," and it reiterated in the body of the text that "Israeli planes targeted military objectives belonging to the Houthis near the Port of Hodeidah in Yemen." In reality, the bombardment affected the electricity infrastructure in Hodeidah and the Ras Isa port, rather than recognized military sites. Gulf Online reported, "Israeli planes launched strikes on Houthi targets," indicating that they targeted the electricity facility and the port because these installations are used for receiving Iranian weapons. So, how do those weapons get to the Houthis under your and your allies’ watch in the sea, sky, and land?

The Saudi newspaper Al-Riyadh stated, "Israel launched strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen on Sunday after the militia fired rockets at Israel over the past two days," adopting the Israeli military's statement as it is: "For the past year, the Houthis have been working to attack the State of Israel, destabilize the region, and affect global shipping." It’s as if Israel is a peaceful nation living on its land, while others are the aggressors.

The Emirati site Al-Sharq Times claimed that "Israel is bombing terrorist targets of the Houthis in Yemen just hours after the attack on Tel Aviv." The Bahraini newspaper Al-Ayyam reported the news in the same context. Some local websites rushed to repeat the same claim that the port and electricity station targeted by Israel are Houthi objectives; and because we are at war with the Houthis, anything under their control does not concern us and thus must be destroyed. Yemen Future stated, "Israel bombs Houthi targets in Yemen hours after the attack on Tel Aviv." This evasion is not limited to a single party; many media outlets everywhere view what is under the control of the opposing side as a legitimate military target to be destroyed, whether it be an airport, airplane, port, hotel, road, water and energy projects, or cultural and historical sites—resources that largely belong to future generations.

We want to agree that those who wage wars and promote them are seeking to make those structures part of their power tools. However, ultimately, they do not belong to them; they belong to the people for whom all these tragedies are unfolding. So, should we not stop targeting and inciting against them?