September 21: The Revolution that Reached Out to Peace and National Partnership

In the trajectories of political history, it is rare for revolutions to coexist with governance, victory with forgiveness, and strength with the call for partnership. Most often, revolutions—once triumphant—tend to impose their vision as an inevitable reality, leaning on the momentum of superiority to enforce dominance. Yet Yemen, on September 21, 2014, broke from this conventional path. The revolution then was not merely a fleeting rebellion against a corrupt authority, but an expression of accumulated popular maturity, one that redefined the national project on the basis of independence and sovereignty—not revenge or elimination.

At that moment, the people prevailed, traditional centers of power collapsed, and the fragility of a state long held hostage by corruption and foreign dependency was laid bare. With the revolution holding the initiative, it did not seek exclusion but immediately proposed an inclusive political agreement: the Peace and National Partnership Agreement—a foundation for building a participatory state representing all, launching a new transitional path beyond the logic of domination, and restoring the will of the Yemeni people.

Yet this agreement, carrying within it the spirit of a just state, was never given the chance to be implemented. From the moment it was signed, it came under political and media siege, as defeated domestic powers saw it as a threat to their interests, while external forces—chief among them Saudi Arabia and the United States—viewed it as a danger to the system of hegemony that had long shaped their relationship with Yemen. Instead of being allowed to live, the agreement was suffocated and aborted, not through negotiation, but through direct military aggression targeting what it represented: a project of national independence, not just a political arrangement.

September 21… The Revolution and the Project of Peace and Partnership

In a complex historical context, the September 21, 2014 revolution in Yemen stood out as more than just a popular uprising against a despotic regime and a corrupt project. It was a comprehensive declaration of a people’s will to overcome long-standing tragedies and rebuild their homeland on new foundations. It was not a moment of spontaneous explosion, but a manifestation of advanced political consciousness, a tool for redefining the relationship between people and state, putting an end to corruption and foreign interference that had drained Yemen for decades. From this revolution emerged a political project carrying its spirit into reality: the Peace and National Partnership Agreement.

This agreement was not an ordinary understanding. It was a genuine expression of a mature popular revolution seeking to reclaim sovereignty and dignity, to achieve inclusive national partnership beyond traditional conflicts, and to establish a state governed by justice and freedom. It represented a serious attempt to move beyond cycles of conflict and war, through consensus on a unified national vision reflecting the aspirations of all Yemeni components. Despite its profound national value, the agreement quickly encountered intense internal and external blockade, exposing the fears of powers that preferred Yemen remain under their influence—showing that its success was tied not only to Yemeni will but also to the struggle over the very fate of the state.

A Reading into the Agreement… Peace and Partnership as a National Will

A Project of State, Not Just a Document

The Peace and National Partnership Agreement was not simply a paper signed under pressure, but a reflection of revolutionary awareness—moving popular action from protest squares to political institution-building. At its core, it carried the features of a new state built on the ruins of one decayed by decades of dependency, patronage, and foreign subordination. Its provisions mirrored cumulative demands not of a single faction, but of a broad spectrum of Yemenis exhausted by corruption, plunder, marginalization, and intervention.

A Government of Competence, Not Quotas

The agreement called for the formation of a national competency government within a set timeframe, free from the destructive party quotas of the past. Its purpose was not appeasement, but to make competence the sole criterion of responsibility—closing the door on hereditary politics and regional power-sharing that had long ruled Yemen.

Responding to People’s Living Demands

Addressing the decision to raise fuel prices—a spark that broke the Yemeni back—the agreement sought immediate redress. This was not just an economic adjustment but a declaration of solidarity with the people’s suffering, rejecting externally imposed “reform” policies that were in reality recipes for poverty and dependency.

Comprehensive National Partnership

The agreement emphasized including all political components in state institutions and dialogue, rejecting exclusion or marginalization of post-revolutionary forces. This shift marked a fundamental transformation: power was no longer the monopoly of one party or coalition, but a genuine partnership based on fair representation.

Implementing the Outcomes of National Dialogue

It reaffirmed the importance of implementing the outcomes of the National Dialogue, addressing sensitive files like the Southern issue and transitional justice—preserving victims’ dignity and restructuring center–periphery relations. This was not a break with dialogue, but its revival and correction.

Restructuring Army and Security Forces

It envisioned restructuring the army and security on national grounds, based on competence and loyalty to the nation, not to individuals or factions. This directly threatened the entrenched deep state that had monopolized arms for self-interest, not public protection.

Serious Anti-Corruption Measures

The agreement demanded anti-corruption action, auditing institutions, and opening looted public wealth files. It was not rhetoric but a clear mandate to clean institutions from the “princes of corruption” who had dominated for decades.

Restoring a Collapsed State

It called for restoring public order, reviving state institutions, and protecting property—clear evidence that the revolution sought not to replace the state, but to rescue it. Revolutionary committees at the time safeguarded property amid a vacuum left by fleeing officials.

Independent Foreign Relations

Externally, the agreement affirmed Yemen’s international relations based on sovereignty, equality, and mutual interests. It was not isolationist but anti-dependency. This clause particularly provoked foreign powers, who saw Yemen as a perpetual sphere of influence.

A Viable National Project

Taken together, the provisions represented the blueprint of a viable national project, had it been allowed to materialize. Instead, they were met with political, media, and later military warfare, because the agreement transformed the revolution from protest into a state project.

The Abortion of Peace and Partnership… The Plot Against an Independent State

Within days of its signing, a broad conspiracy unfolded. Global hegemonic powers—especially the U.S. and Saudi Arabia—recognized that the agreement threatened their system of tutelage. It was not the details but the spirit: ending dependency, building inclusive partnership, and reclaiming Yemeni decision-making. Rather than negotiations, they aborted it through force, pushing local tools to renege and launching direct military aggression under false pretexts.

The conspiracy targeted not only the political process but the very idea itself—through infrastructure destruction, institutional collapse, social fragmentation, and chaos-serving foreign interests. The agreement was aborted not because it was weak, but because it was politically powerful, threatening decades of imposed tutelage.

A Project Unimplemented, Yet Alive

The Peace and National Partnership Agreement was not a fleeting political paper—it was a comprehensive state-building project grounded in sovereignty, partnership, and independence. Though denied execution by foreign intervention and conspiracy, it did not collapse. It endures as testimony to a unique moment of Yemeni revolutionary maturity.

Its abortion proved not its failure, but its danger to hegemonic powers. It showed that the revolution sought not vengeance but a homeland for all. Today, the agreement still represents a national reference for anyone pursuing genuine peace based on respect and equitable partnership. Its spirit remains a living call for Yemenis to move forward independently, carrying the banners of sovereignty, dignity, and just peace.