“Bloomberg” Reveals U.S. Role in Decision to Relocate Commercial Banks from Sanaa and the Reasons Behind It

NYN | Reports and analyses:

The American agency Bloomberg reported that the decision by the Aden government to relocate the headquarters of commercial banks from Sanaa to Aden was directed by the United States. In a report, it added that the economic war being waged against the Sanaa government, or what they called the “Houthis,” through targeting the banking sector in their areas aims to pressure the Sanaa government forces to stop their attacks on Israeli navigation.

The report confirmed that Washington informed the parties in Yemen, including Saudi Arabia, that the key elements of the UN-led plan committed to in December cannot proceed unless what it called the “Houthi group” ends its hostile maritime campaign against Israeli ships.

The Bloomberg report warned that suspending the peace agreement could undo the fragile two-year truce and reignite ground fighting between the warring factions in Yemen, potentially drawing Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries such as the UAE into a new Middle Eastern conflict that would be difficult to halt.

According to Bloomberg, the American decision regarding the UN peace plan in Yemen coincided with the Central Bank in Aden taking a series of measures against banks located in Houthi-controlled areas in northern Yemen, including the capital Sanaa.

Bloomberg quoted four people with direct knowledge of the situation as saying, “The move by the Central Bank has the support of the United States and Western allies and likely received implicit approval from the Saudis, who finance the Aden government and its central bank.”

Bloomberg quoted an unnamed U.S. State Department official, due to the sensitivity of the matter, confirming that President Joe Biden’s administration supports peace in Yemen. However, he emphasized that the agreements related to the so-called UN roadmap can only continue if the Houthis stop their Red Sea attacks, which began in November, ostensibly to pressure Israel to end its war in Gaza.

The U.S. Ambassador to Yemen, Steven Fagin, confirmed during a seminar held by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy at the end of May that the Aden government will not sign a peace agreement with the Sanaa government or what he called the “Houthis,” considering it “impossible.”

The American ambassador said, “The Yemeni government will not sign a peace agreement where the Houthis have the upper hand by continuing to obtain weapons, ballistic missiles, and drones. This is impossible. We cannot achieve real peace with this equation.”

He added, “The peace roadmap presented by Saudi Arabia to the United Nations is not an agreement in the full sense of the word but a first step on a long path to reaching a solution. This roadmap, if we are realistic, will not be feasible in the near term, given the Houthis’ intentions and motivations and the complexities of this conflict. Therefore, we should not rush and should not build unrealistic expectations.”

He continued, “I can say now that we are far from achieving that fundamental solution, but we are working on building some sort of transitional arrangements through creating steps to facilitate the peace process,” without specifying the nature of those arrangements. However, observers said they are related to economic pressures to be exerted against the Sanaa government.

It is noteworthy that the leader of the Ansar Allah (Houthis) movement, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, said in a televised speech last Thursday, “The American is trying to embroil the Saudi in pressuring the banks in Sanaa,” considering this an “aggressive step and a dangerous game,” adding, “I advise the Saudi to beware of being ensnared by the American side in service of the Israeli enemy,” explaining that “targeting banks in Sanaa is aggression in the economic sphere, and if the Saudi becomes involved in service of Israel, he will find himself in big trouble.”

He continued, “The Saudi is free from problems and why should he offer himself and his capabilities to serve the Israeli enemy?” warning against any “supportive steps for the Israeli enemy against our country without justification,” affirming that “any hostile actions against our country will not deter us from our stance in support of Gaza, even if some Arab regimes go to war in service of the Israeli enemy.”