A thought-provoking dialogue session was held in Taiz to examine the history of conflicts in Yemen, explore prospects for transitional justice, and discuss pathways toward national reconciliation. The session brought together representatives of political parties, researchers, human rights activists, lawyers, and social and political figures. Participants reviewed Yemen’s conflict trajectory from the 1960s to the present day, highlighting the impact of foreign interventions, the role of laws and agreements, the limits of past achievements, and the prospects of applying transitional justice in the country.
The session, the second of its kind, following an earlier academic forum, was organized under the Transitional Justice Ambassadors Forum as part of the SPARK Project, implemented by the Abductees’ Mothers Association and the SAM Organization for Rights and Liberties, in partnership with the ITI Institute.
The facilitator opened the four-hour session, which included a short break, by outlining its objectives and rules of engagement. He emphasized the importance of openness, constructive dialogue, and respect for differing opinions. Participants were then divided into working groups to explore Yemen’s conflicts since the 1960s — their causes and consequences. Each group presented a summary of its findings, followed by open discussion and reflection.
The Memory of Conflict: From Revolution to Division
The discussion began by revisiting Yemen’s turbulent history — a journey where politics and blood often intertwined. From the September 1962 Revolution and the Siege of Sana’a, to the January 1986 events in the South, and the 1994 war that deepened divisions between North and South. Then came the Sa‘dah wars (2004–2010), which opened the door to sectarian polarization, followed by the February 2011 Revolution with its demands for justice and dignity — later stifled by the 2014 coup and the full-scale war that has persisted since 2015.
“One chapter of our history always closes on an open wound, we never heal; we only recreate the pain in new forms,” remarked one participant in a trembling voice, capturing the cyclical nature of Yemen’s conflicts.
Foreign Interventions: Support or Escalation?
The discussion also examined the role of external actors — Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, Libya, and Britain — and how their involvement left mixed legacies: providing support in some periods and fueling conflict in others. As one participant put it, “Perhaps intervention itself was not the problem, but rather the absence of a national compass that could have turned it into partnership instead of guardianship.”
Justice or Reconciliation First?
When the dialogue turned to transitional justice, opinions diverged.
One participant stated firmly: “There can be no reconciliation without justice, otherwise, we will find ourselves back in the same circle.”
Another countered: “Justice alone is not enough. We need reconciliation so we can coexist before holding each other accountable.”
Despite the difference in tone, participants ultimately converged on a shared vision: justice and reconciliation are two sides of the same peace — neither can endure without the other.
The Immunity Law: Gateway to Dialogue or Barrier to Justice?
The 2012 Immunity Law, which granted protection to former regime figures, sparked lively debate. Some saw it as a necessary step to enable the National Dialogue Conference, while others described it as “forgiveness without justice” that deprived victims of their rights.
A human rights activist noted that the law “closed the door to accountability and opened the door to doubt about the sincerity of any future reconciliation process.”
Global Lessons and Yemen’s Unique Path
Speakers reflected on international experiences, from Rwanda, Cambodia, Morocco, Tunisia, and Bosnia, recognizing that while their outcomes differed, they shared one message: there is no peace without truth, and no reconciliation without acknowledgment.
However, participants agreed that Yemen requires a model of its own, one inspired by global lessons but not a mere imitation. It must respect Yemen’s social and tribal fabric and address its complex reality on its own terms.
A Proposed Roadmap
The session concluded with a series of transparent and forward-looking recommendations, including:
Establishing two parallel and complementary tracks for peace and transitional justice, ensuring integration rather than contradiction.
Creating an independent national body for truth-seeking, reparations, and victim representation.
Launching programs for compensation, rehabilitation, and institutional reform, particularly in the judiciary and security sectors, to rebuild public trust.
Prioritizing urgent humanitarian issues such as missing persons, internally displaced people, and landmine victims, within a realistic and time-bound framework.
Securing international monitoring and follow-up mechanisms to ensure implementation and prevent political interference.
Conclusion: A Memory That Endures, and Hope That Persists
As the session ended, one attendee whispered while leaving: “Perhaps we cannot afford the luxury of forgetting, but we have the courage to remember — so we do not repeat our mistakes.”
In that moment, it was clear that Yemen’s path toward transitional justice is not a short journey, but a long collective quest for awareness and truth — a road toward genuine peace built on acknowledgment, accountability, and will.
