The ongoing conflict in Yemen stands as one of the most overlooked and often forgotten humanitarian disasters worldwide. What is surprising about the War is that despite the right call for justice in Palestine, Sudan, and Ukraine, Yemen, equally battered by foreign intervention and civilian devastation, fades into the periphery of global outrage. War reflects a very broad pattern of selective outrage and geopolitical neglect, where the suffering of certain populations is consistently marginalized in global discourse in an era when the Global South is increasingly asserting its voice in shaping the norms of international justice.  Since 2015, a Saudi-led coalition, including the UAE, has been conducting military operations against Houthi rebels in Yemen. This coalition has been accused by United Nations investigators of war crimes, including bombing civilian areas such as bombing residential neighborhoods, markets, funerals, weddings, jails, boats and medical facilities, killing thousands of civilians. Furthermore, it has been accused of creating blockades on Yemeni ports and airspace, preventing vital food, fuel, and humanitarian goods which has contributed to famine in large swathes of Yemen and a human catastrophe. The coalition has also been charged with imposing blockades on Yemeni ports and airspace, severely limiting food, fuel and humanitarian aid, leading to widespread famine and a desperate humanitarian crisis. The blockade and ensuing starvation have been termed acts constituting genocide or extermination.

From Mistakes to Massacres

The Saudi-led coalition’s airstrikes in Yemen have drawn repeated condemnation for violating international humanitarian law (IHL). Of particular importance is the principles of distinction which requires avoiding civilian targets and proportionality which mandates that military advantage must outweigh civilian harm. Over the years, evidence has been collected indicating a consistent pattern of civilian casualties and infrastructure disruption that has serious legal and ethical implications.

A striking example Saudi coalition’s impunity regarding civilian life and its failure to fulfill its obligation to protect civilians was three separate airstrikes in January 2022 that killed 80 civilians and wounded 156 others, striking a prison in Saada, a telecommunications facility, and a gas station in Hodeidah at locations where eyewitnesses reported the absence of military presence.. Notably, this is not an isolated incident but part of a broader pattern of indiscriminate targeting that has marked the coalition’s conduct throughout the conflict. By 2017, a staggering 60% of the 16,700 documented civilian casualties were linked to coalition airstrikes, a statistic that strongly suggests systemic violations of international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of distinction and proportionality. For example, the 2018 bombing of a school bus in Dhahyan, which killed 26 children, was deemed an “apparent war crime” by Human Rights Watch. Likewise, the 2016 attack on a funeral hall in Sanaa claimed 140 civilian lives, an atrocity the coalition later admitted was a “mistake”. Together, these incidents represent a disturbing trend of civilians’ infrastructure and gatherings being overly frequently misidentified or overlooked as valid military sites raising serious concerns about the coalition’s targeting procedures and mechanism of accountability.

Fuel, Famine, and Failed Justifications

The Saudi-led coalition’s justification for maintaining its blockade of Yemen citing the need to prevent Iranian arms smuggling to Houthi rebels is critically undermined by independent UN findings and humanitarian analyses, particularly from the UN Verification and Inspection Mechanism (UNVIM), which found no weapons in 90% of inspected vessels bound for Houthi-controlled ports like Hodeidah. Despite this, the coalition continues to restrict vital imports of food and fuel, exacerbating Yemen’s humanitarian crisis, where 90% of necessities are imported and where, by 2020, over 131,000 deaths were linked to preventable causes such as famine, lack of clean water, and inadequate healthcare. The World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) classifies this blockade as "torture in slow motion" demonstrating how restricted fuel access disables hospital services and water systems. While the coalition claims Houthis use civilian areas and ports for military purposes, UN inspections consistently find no evidence of systematic port militarization, and the coalition’s own investigations into civilian airstrike casualties lack transparency and accountability. 

The blockade, defended through UN Security Council Resolution 2216 (2015), has instead resulted in severe civilian harm, with diesel imports to Houthi areas falling by 75% between 2015 and 2017, effectively paralyzing essential infrastructure. Legal experts and human rights groups have characterized the blockade as an act of collective punishment and weaponized famine, which they say violate international humanitarian law and can constitute war crimes or even torture under the UN Convention Against Torture. Thus, the coalition’s claims are not supported by credible evidence, and the blockade functions primarily as economic warfare rather than arms control, making international accountability mechanisms such as ICC investigations and arms embargoes urgently necessary to halt further violations and prevent mass suffering.

Legally, the Saudi-led coalition claims it targets legitimate military sites and justifies the blockade by citing intercepted Iranian arms like Russian Kornets and Chinese rifles. However, this justification becomes legally and ethically problematic when measured against the principles of IHL, particularly the principle of proportionality. According to a 2018 United Nations report, coalition airstrikes frequently failed to demonstrate a clear effort to minimize civilian harm, with documented attacks on markets, funerals, and other non-military gatherings. The use of explosive weapons in very densely populated areas breaches norms and also raises serious concerns about indiscriminate and disproportionate force. Under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), even if a target has military value, the attack must not cause civilian harm excessively in relation to the anticipated military advantage. In this context, the military value of the alleged targets is vastly outweighed by the consistent and severe civilian toll. The coalition’s ongoing blockade worsens the crisis, restricting fuel and aid which leads to a blatant international humanitarian law violation. Thus, ignoring these violations risks normalizing impunity in war, eroding civilian protections, and weakening the very foundations of international humanitarian law for future conflicts.

Human Rights Rhetoric vs. Reality

The ongoing civilian casualties in Yemen are the result of both the coalition’s conduct and the enabling support provided by international actors like the United States and the United Kingdom. Despite training programs aimed at reducing civilian harm, coalition airstrikes continue to cause significant civilian deaths and injuries. Since 2015, over 19,200 civilians including more than 2,300 children have been killed or maimed by coalition airstrikes alone. The coalition has been documented systematically targeting civilian infrastructure such as hospitals, markets, and water stations.

International supporters such as the US and UK supporters have supplied weapons such as MK-82 bombs and precision-guided munitions, along with military intelligence and logistical support. The coalition has been able to maintain its air campaign and repeatedly breach IHL because of this support. The continuation of civilian casualties despite training and oversight suggests a degree of complicity by these Western states in potential war crimes. For example, in 2024 and early 2025, the US and UK accounted for a growing share of civilian casualties from airstrikes, with a 71% increase in civilian harm in the first three months of 2025 alone.

This dual responsibility coalition conduct and enabling external support raises serious questions about the credibility of Western human rights rhetoric globally. On one hand, these countries publicly advocate for human rights and international law. On the other, their arms sales and military assistance contribute directly to violations on the ground. Therefore, this contradiction undermines their moral authority and weakens global efforts to enforce accountability. By failing to halt the arms sales or condition support on strict adherence to IHL, trust in Western pledges on human rights and international law is undermined.

From Words to Action

The Saudi-led coalition's actions in Yemen Including indiscriminate airstrikes and a sustained blockade have resulted in widespread violations of International Humanitarian Law, with civilian infrastructure repeatedly targeted and the blockade exacerbating famine and disease. Politically, it has exacerbated fragmentation and conferred more power on rival factions such as the Southern Transitional Council, thereby undermining ambitions for national unity. Economically, the blockade has crippled infrastructure, delaying reconstruction and development for decades.  To address this, international legal mechanisms must be enforced: the International Criminal Court should investigate potential war crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute, while the UN Security Council must impose an arms embargo in accordance with Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. Ongoing arms transfers by the U.S. and U.K. violate the Arms Trade Treaty and must be halted. Furthermore, the blockade, which amounts to collective punishment in violation of Article 33 of the Geneva Conventions, must be lifted to restore critical humanitarian access. On the diplomatic and humanitarian front, donor states must fulfill the UN’s $4.3 billion aid appeal, while regional actors such as the GCC and Oman should leverage the 2023 Saudi-Iran détente to initiate sustained peace negotiations with the Houthis. Civil society organizations like Mwatana must be supported in documenting abuses and pursuing justice, while reparations in line with UN principles should be offered to victims, funded through redirected arms sales profits. Establishing long term peace and stability in Yemen is contingent on ending impunity, restoring humanitarian aid, and promoting inclusive political reconstruction as a means of preventing further radicalisation and state collapse.

Conclusion: Reclaiming Justice from the Margins

The war in Yemen demands more than condemnation, it requires consequences. As states and civil societies of the Global South increasingly assert their voice in global governance, Yemen must become a benchmark for principled engagement. Despite the existence of robust legal mechanisms, powerful nations have been complicit in allowing violations to proceed through arms transfers and have failed to implement measures to prevent the occurrences, allowing a dangerous precedent of impunity to take root. It is time for the Global South to lead in shaping a new international norm: one in which sovereignty does not shield war crimes, and civilian lives are not subordinated to strategic alliances. Justice for Yemen is not merely about the past, but it is also a commitment to a more credible, equitable, and humane global order. 

Note: This piece is an excerpt from Justice Sleeps: The Forgotten War on Yemen’s Civilians. Published in Modern Diplomacy and available here