In Praise of Tyrants

The anti-war Left and the Houthis

jihadist

Since the gruesome attack by Hamas on October 7^th kicked off the latest, and deadliest, round of carnage in Gaza (the latest figure is 28,000 dead), cities throughout the world that have bustling with protest. Most of these protests have justly called for a ceasefire, along with a just settlement for the Palestinians (though there is a difference of opinion as to what that settlement should be: a two-state solution or a one state solution. Two cents: It is pretty difficult to imagine a majority of Israeli Jews giving up the Zionist project at this time).

     As par the course during times like this, accusations of anti-Semitism cast a fairly wide net. ‘From the River to the sea’ is a common refrain from protestors (including those who occupied the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in New York this past weekend- a large banner with those words was hung over the central staircase) and a lightning rod for defenders of Israel. Arguments over what exactly the phrase means will never end. Certainly, many of the accusations are frivolous, but that doesn’t mean there haven’t been some questionable incidents. There was that bizarre moment in New York in front of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, the world famous hospital, with protestors accusing the hospital of committing genocide (something about accepting a donation). A similar protest broke out last December in Philadelphia in front of Goldie Falafel, a popular Israeli restaurant co-owned by award winning chef Michael Solomonov (again something about a donation).  Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro described the incident as “a blatant act of anti-Semitism.” In Oakland, a City Council meeting last November on a cease fire resolution devolved into numerous ‘activists’ speaking out against including a condemnation of Hamas in the resolution, praising Hamas as ‘brave resistance fighters.’

       But the prize here has to go those who in recent weeks have taken to cheering on the Houthis (officially known as Ansar Allah) for their attacks on cargo ships passing through Red Sea in some apparent support of the Palestinians. The chant here goes something like “Yemen Yemen, make us proud. Turn another ship around.” It can be seen here at a recent protest at Colombia University:

https://twitter.com/Hoodview/status/1756135831654269288

Here is one in London:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/13/pro-palestinian-demonstrator-blames-us-israel-hamas-attack/

Here is another in New York. This one happened under the banner of a group that calls itself the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL): 

https://twitter.com/pslnational/status/1741539421562794150

The question always comes down to whose liberation exactly. The party’s 2024 presidential candidate (yes, they actually have one) is Claudia de la Cruz. Her take on Ukraine: ‘We cannot talk about the war in Ukraine without naming the system that produces eternal war: it is called US imperialism…the war in Ukraine is a U.S. war.’ What is the party line on Syria? PSL leader Brian Becker called Syrians in revolt “pawns” in a U.S. game. Another article described them “imperialist stooges posing as “pro-democracy” forces.” As for the Assad dictatorship: “an organized force against Zionism and for Palestinian national liberation.” How about North Korea? “Like the great majority of accusations hurled at North Korea in the past, the UNHRC Report (United Nations Human Rights Commission) rings hollow as a thinly veiled justification for U.S. aggression toward North Korea.” That is a questionable idea of liberation to say the least.

      Why spend any time looking at a bunch of crackpot nobodies? Because as is too often the case with this kind of thing, the rot may go deeper than many suspect. PSL can probably be dismissed as a fringe, but what about the Green Party, which as far as third parties go, has captured more votes than any such party the past 20 years? It was under their flag that Ralph Nader ran his famous 2000 presidential campaign. Jill Stein is their presidential candidate now and was their presidential candidate in 2016. It was right around that time Stein was photographed sharing a table with Putin and other slimy luminaries at an RT event in Moscow. Stein’s running mate in 2016 was Ajamu Baraka. Baraka is another figure who goes to amazing lengths to defend likes of Assad. In 2014, in the aftermath of an ‘election’ in Syria that saw Assad get 92 percent of the vote, 21 of 23 would-be opponents were arbitrarily disqualified, leaving only two loyalists running ‘against’ him, Baraka rejoiced with “tens of thousands of ordinary Syrians went to the polls to cast a vote that was more about Syrian dignity and self-determination than any of the candidates on the ballot.” He also claimed Assad attempted to “address the first protests demanding democratic reforms through peaceful means,” despite hundreds of videos of demonstrators being massacred in the first days and weeks of protest. His current take:

‘For Palestinians, the people of Yemen, Libya, the one Million Black Folks incarcerated in the U.S., the next Black victims of police violence, the unhoused, pregnant Black and Brown women, the uninsured, the people of Cuba and Venezuela, Julian Assange- what is the difference?’

      Still too fringy? How about another current presidential candidate: superstar Leftist Cornel West (who by the way has shared certainly shared a stage or two with the likes of de la Cruz). On January 24^th West declared on X:

‘By ordering airstrikes against the sovereign nation of Yemen @Potus has likely misused an Authorization to Use Military Force…Make no mistake these strikes were conducted by a previous and current empire because the Houthis successfully disrupted the global flow of capital via protest to show solidarity with Gaza.’

While opposing the retaliatory strikes on Houthis positions is quite predictable, and maybe not completely unreasonable, though perhaps an ounce or two of solidarity for the workers on board the ships, the largest numbers of whom come from the Philippines and India, would also be warranted (in fact the Indian navy has been in heavily involved in providing security for ships). But just to unpack this a bit: first, the Houthis, though they rule over a majority of people in Yemen, are not the recognized government so that “sovereign nation” bit isn’t quite accurate.

       What about that last line about successfully disrupting capital? The Houthis claim to be targeting ships that connected to the U.S., Israel, and Britain, however they have targeted plenty of ships with no such connection (as if the Houthis would have intimate knowledge of the shipping industry). While the attacks have succeeded in diverting a good amount shipping around the Horn of Africa, traffic on the route has dropped to just 30 percent of normal levels, adding cost and time to voyages, insurance costs have increased (insurance companies are always looking for reasons to jack up rates), there is no real evidence the attacks have harmed the U.S. economy. Roughly 10 percent of global shipping passes through the Red Sea, meaning a great majority of global supply chains are unaffected. It doesn’t exactly appear any of this is influencing the Israeli government either.

      Are the attacks having any potential effects? Actually, they may well have. The Red Sea is a vital source of dollars for Egypt. The Economist reports that the Egyptian government earned $9 billion last year from tolls on the Suez Canal. Without that revenue Egypt’s central bank would have run out of foreign reserves, which stood at $16 billion at the start of 2023. The potential tribulations of the Egyptian dictatorship are not of concern? Fair enough. How about this: Eritrea is one of the world’s poorer economies and it is propped up by fishing, farming, and mining exports that travel by sea. Or for crisis-racked Sudan? The Red Sea is the sole point of entry for aid, the flow of which has been affected by the attacks. ‘Black Lives Matter’ was surely a slogan not long ago.

The Houthis are a strange choice for anyone waving the anti-war flag. They have launched six wars in Yemen. The U.S. and Israel are not new targets for the Houthis. Their official slogan reads "God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam." Does one have to guess what it is like to live under their rule? For instance, Barron’s recently reported that a Houthi-run court in Yemen has sentenced 13 people to public execution on homosexuality charges. That includes seven people sentenced to stoning and two for crucifixion. On top of establishing a harsh Islamist regime the Houthis have had practice in disruption. A Human Right Watch report from December 11^th explains:

The Houthis have weaponized water in Taizz by blocking water in the two basins under their control from flowing into government-controlled Taizz city, where the main water control station that treats and distributes water throughout the network is located. The Houthis have blocked this water despite clear knowledge that Taizz city residents rely on water from these basins…The Houthis have also been blamed for laying landmines in and around water infrastructure and facilities.

It is true that their Houthis connection to the Iranian government motivated the U.S. government to assist Saudi-led campaign against the Houthis (it would wrong to label the Houthis complete Iranian proxies, but they certainly receive support from the mullahs in Iran. Another source of support is the North Korean regime). U.S. foreign policy is nothing if it is not shortsighted. The U.S. provided refueling services and intelligence to the Saudis for years. Beyond that the House of Saud has long been one of the world’s biggest customers for U.S. weapons. In 2019, it was the allegedly anti-war President Trump who vetoed bi-partisan legislation that would have forced an end to American involvement. His then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pushed through an “emergency” $8 billion weapons sale in August 2020 against the wishes of Congress. The war in Yemen now sits in a fragile peace and the country divided. But this is just another way of stating the obvious: any part of an anti-war movement that thoughtlessly sympathizes with any of this is a movement only in name. And one that does little to help Palestinians.