The 2011 Yemeni Uprising, generally subsumed under the “Arab Spring” in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere, was popularly portrayed as being “secular” but subsequently hijacked by “religious” forces. Such ubiquitous assumptions take for granted that democracy is essentially secular. This essay examines the secularizing effects embedded in the language and epistemology of security concerns invoked by international and regional powers vis-à-vis Yemen, allowing powerful states to intervene in matters of politics and religion. They generate and are generated by a culture of apprehension, which is cultivated and circulated within a discursive social space of security practices. This culture, I contend, has produced Yemen as a “security crisis” over the longue durée, and was articulated through discourses of republic protection and weak state security since the Cold War, and given new life by the “Global War on Terror”. It is these secular security discourses and the culture of apprehension they generate, rallied by the international and regional powers such as the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which discursively produced and maintained a “weak” Yemeni state, thereby justifying the de-democratizing interventions in the Yemeni polity. I conclude by arguing that attending to the effect of such discourses may explain the world’s largest humanitarian crisis Yemen has become.

2011 年也门起义在埃及、突尼斯和其他地方普遍被归入“阿拉伯之春”之下，被普遍描述为“世俗”，但随后被“宗教”势力劫持。这种无处不在的假设理所当然地认为民主本质上是世俗的。本文考察了国际和地区大国对也门的安全关切的语言和认识论中所蕴含的世俗化影响，允许强国干预政治和宗教事务。它们产生并由一种忧虑文化产生，这种文化在安全实践的话语社会空间中得到培养和传播。我认为，这种文化使也门成为长期持续的“安全危机”，并通过冷战以来的共和国保护和国家安全薄弱的话语表达出来，并通过“全球反恐战争”赋予新的生命。正是这些世俗的安全话语及其产生的忧虑文化，在美国和沙特阿拉伯王国等国际和地区大国的团结下，以话语方式产生并维持了一个“弱”的也门国家，从而证明了对也门政体的民主干预。最后，我认为关注此类话语的影响可以解释也门已成为世界上最大的人道主义危机。由美国和沙特阿拉伯王国等国际和地区大国团结起来，这些大国在话语上产生并维持了一个“软弱”的也门国家，从而为也门政体的非民主化干预提供了正当理由。最后，我认为关注这些话语的影响可以解释也门已经成为世界上最大的人道主义危机。由美国和沙特阿拉伯王国等国际和地区大国团结起来，这些大国在话语上产生并维持了一个“软弱”的也门国家，从而为也门政体的非民主化干预提供了正当理由。最后，我认为关注此类话语的影响可以解释也门已成为世界上最大的人道主义危机。