217
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

That's not really an answer to my question. "Control" does not get you sovereignty, and neither does "representing the people". It comes down to governance and international recognition. Mexican cartels control large areas of the country, but no one is arguing they have sovereignty. Similarly, there are many repressive regimes in the world that do not represent their people, but they maintain their sovereignty.

[-] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Your analogy falls flat because, while powerful, cartels are rarely looking to supplant state control. Instead they seek state complicity which is a different thing altogether.

Ansar Allah on the other hand has set up its own governance structures. As I said, most of the populated regions of Yemen are governed under these structures. That’s despite a US backed campaign to bomb and starve them out over most of the last decade.

If the US doesn’t want to recognize the sovereignty of the Ansar Allah led Yemeni government then the US concept of sovereignty is effectively meaningless.

[-] TigrisMorte@kbin.social -3 points 10 months ago

No matter how hard you stamp your feet, you don't get to redefine terms already in use.

[-] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago

I’m not? The US is using an incoherent notion of sovereignty that just so happens to align with their geopolitical interests. Sorry if that’s a hard truth for you to accept.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
217 points (82.4% liked)

World News

32318 readers
783 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS