UN’s Yemen Debate: Words in New York, Wounds in Sana’a

In the solemn chamber of the United Nations Security Council this week, formality was on full display. Javier Martínez-Acha, Panama’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and Council President for August, sat at the head of the table, guiding discussion on Yemen. The setting was dignified; the topic, urgent. Yet the gap between diplomatic ceremony and the realities on the ground in Yemen remains painfully wide.

Delegates spoke of maritime security, political dialogue, and the importance of humanitarian access. They reaffirmed their commitment to peace and the sovereignty of Yemen. But in Sana’a, Aden, and countless villages, these words echo faintly against the daily struggle for food, water, and safety.

For nearly a decade, Yemen’s war has destroyed more than buildings — it has eroded hope itself. Millions face hunger. Hospitals run on dwindling supplies. Children grow up knowing only conflict. And while each Security Council meeting holds the possibility of progress, too often the pattern repeats: speeches are made, resolutions are drafted, and on the ground, little changes.

Panama’s leadership this month is notable. A small nation with global maritime importance, it understands the stakes of keeping vital sea lanes open. Yet Yemen’s tragedy cannot be reduced to shipping routes. It is first and foremost a human catastrophe — one that demands urgent, sustained action.

India has a moral and strategic reason to be involved. We have a tradition of speaking for the voiceless and backing our words with action. Yemen lies in our extended neighbourhood. Instability there ripples outward, affecting regional trade, security, and the welfare of Indian expatriates in the Gulf. Our diplomacy should press for a nationwide ceasefire, guarantee safe passage for aid convoys, and ensure accountability for those who violate humanitarian law.

The Security Council must do more than manage the crisis — it must end it. That means moving from debate to decisive steps: binding commitments, enforceable timelines, and the political will to hold all sides accountable. Diplomacy will always be deliberate, but Yemen’s clock is running out.

Every day without action means more lives lost, more futures stolen. If the Council truly believes in the principles it invokes, it must prove it in deeds, not just in dialogue. When it meets next, the world should not be greeted by yet another recital of concerns, but by evidence that the suffering in Yemen is finally beginning to ease.