Those who conclude a collapse will have to recognize the invalidity of previous systems, situations and experiences, because if they were valid, they would not collapse one after the other! However, what is worse than saying that "the republic failed" are the explanations given for the failure. They will say, for example, that it failed because it was a foreign formula imported to Yemen. Throughout history, many countries have imported various foreign forms and styles of government, including the republic, and they have not failed. Is the republican idea less foreign in China, Egypt or India, for example, than in Yemen? not at all. If it is true that ancient Rome was the source of the republican idea for the first time, it means that all republican countries in the world, except Rome, are importers and transmitters of a foreign idea! What is strange is that whoever says the republic failed because it was imported and foreign uses imported logic, foreign critical language and foreign measurement models! I say this as I have written repeatedly since 2011 against blind imitation and copying of everything without considering the Yemeni reality and its privacy. This does not mean that I am against transference, influence and rational use and insight into the experiences and ideas of others as necessary. One of the latest researchers says that the Gulf countries succeeded because they preserved the traditional (authentic) forms of social and political organization. Tribal, Sultanist and Sheikh and Yemen failed because it neglected them and wore a foreign shirt, which is the Republic and imported modernity! Our friend the researcher knows that there are many other factors that explain the failure here and the success there, but he is overly inclined to easy and one-sided answers. The second thing is that if Yemen were to abandon the traditional (authentic) social and political forms of organization, this means that the abandonment was possible, and therefore this is evidence of the failure of these forms. If they were valid, they would not collapse and would not be abandoned! Here we ask the same argument that this researcher used to say that the republic in Yemen is a failure and invalid: because the collapse happened in the shadow! Since 1962 AD, the Republic has become the title of an experiment, and no longer the name of an idea, theory or moral aspiration.

Those who conclude a collapse will have to recognize the invalidity of previous systems, situations and experiences, because if they were valid, they would not collapse one after the other! However, what is worse than saying that "the republic failed" are the explanations given for the failure. They will say, for example, that it failed because it was a foreign formula imported to Yemen. Throughout history, many countries have imported various foreign forms and styles of government, including the republic, and they have not failed. Is the republican idea less foreign in China, Egypt or India, for example, than in Yemen? not at all. If it is true that ancient Rome was the source of the republican idea for the first time, it means that all republican countries in the world, except Rome, are importers and transmitters of a foreign idea! What is strange is that whoever says the republic failed because it was imported and foreign uses imported logic, foreign critical language and foreign measurement models! I say this as I have written repeatedly since 2011 against blind imitation and copying of everything without considering the Yemeni reality and its privacy. This does not mean that I am against transference, influence and rational use and insight into the experiences and ideas of others as necessary. One of the latest researchers says that the Gulf countries succeeded because they preserved the traditional (authentic) forms of social and political organization. Tribal, Sultanist and Sheikh and Yemen failed because it neglected them and wore a foreign shirt, which is the Republic and imported modernity! Our friend the researcher knows that there are many other factors that explain the failure here and the success there, but he is overly inclined to easy and one-sided answers. The second thing is that if Yemen were to abandon the traditional (authentic) social and political forms of organization, this means that the abandonment was possible, and therefore this is evidence of the failure of these forms. If they were valid, they would not collapse and would not be abandoned! Here we ask the same argument that this researcher used to say that the republic in Yemen is a failure and invalid: because the collapse happened in the shadow! Since 1962 AD, the Republic has become the title of an experiment, and no longer the name of an idea, theory or moral aspiration.