Having recently captured the capital Sanaa 30,000 rebels, belonging to the Yemeni Shiite tribes who recognize themselves in the action of the insurgent movement al-Houthi have completed the President Abed Rabbo Mansour to form a new broad-based government by ensuring, if not, to be ready for any alternative solution.
The pressure exerted by the Shiite tribes, under the umbrella insurgent al-Houthi militia, has reached a crucial phase since it has practically obtained the goal of influencing the political life of the country if, as seems inevitable, the President Mansour shall comply with the request. The al-Houthi militia, it must be said, however, has announced the intention to continue to fight both the militants of al-Qaeda and both Americans and Jews, according to the well noted litany "Death to America, Death to Israel, Damn Jews and victory for Islam" chorus that evokes the times of the Iranian revolution whose followers seem to act in support of al-Houthi.
The clash between Sunni and Shiite factions repeats what is happening in Syria and Iraq by defining a scenario of all-out struggle between different conceptions of Islam and Islamic law.
So putting in a proper light that the issue is confessional and inside the Islamic world should be added that the decisive role in all these disputes is covered by the tribes that are the real, true and irrefutable master of the territory. The nineteenth-century idea of the nation-state, exported by the British and French colonialism, in these countries has failed and has no reason to exist and so did the concept of democratic change that turned out to be ephemeral.
A century of nationalism has served the West to contain and control this territories. This is an obvious fact, and remains so, but it should be taken in consideration and encouragement of a different political relationship with this world. What is the relationship, for example, we want to engage with the Islamic State? An exclusively military is absurd because unsustainable from an economic standpoint, but more importantly from the cultural and pragmatic perspective. Twenty years of war, military confrontation does not solved the issues on the table of diplomacy but it always create new ways of antagonism. The transition from the age of nation-states does not pass through the imposition of western model of democracy falling from a system that is based on a cultural and philosophical “journey” that the Arabs have not experienced. Rather it goes through the mediation of new and different forms of collaboration useful as a basis for future business relations even decades to come. I believe that it would be better to let these people organize themselves according to their own cultural patterns giving rise to a new phase of development in the area certainly attractive from the point of view of trade relations to the west. In this way you will also curb the radicalism thanks to an interconnected world. The Arab Springs are the results of an instance starting from below, by the people, this is the real news that should be pointed out. In Egypt, the radicalism of the Muslim Brotherhood was defeated and deflated as soon as its policies have proved to be not in line with the needs of the population.
In essence, the efforts of military and cultural abuse have failed and so it should be good to give way to the most appropriate communications policy and sharing.
More than democracy it is the case to export ideas whose value counter effectively any radicalism of which no people feel naturally the need.