The Financial Times calls for an end to U.S. support for the war on Yemen:

It should not have required the massacre of more than 140 people at a funeral for Washington to review support for the Saudi-led coalition’s brutish war in Yemen. There have been numerous other massacres that should already have prompted action. In their bid to pummel Houthi rebels into submission and restore an ousted ally to the capital, Sana’a, the Saudi air force has — intentionally or not — struck hospitals, weddings, schools, mosques and marketplaces, according to a report to the UN Security Council. These attacks undoubtedly contravene international law. They also contribute to creating the conditions for a famine.

Obviously, I agree with the editorial. The editors are particularly on point when they say later that “reassuring” the Saudis “can be no justification for abetting possible war crimes.” The Saudi-led intervention is and always has been indefensible, and it is an abiding mark of shame on both the U.S. and British governments that they have supported and continue to support it. Perhaps because it was so destructive and egregious, last weekend’s funeral massacre seems to have prompted a new surge in criticism of the war. That is welcome, but it is also long overdue. It should have not haven taken eighteen months of fruitless violence and the starvation of the civilian population to spur calls for a change in policy. It remains to be seen how the U.S. and British governments will respond. The right and smart thing to do has been clear for well over a year: Washington and London should halt all assistance to the coalition, push for a cease-fire, demand the lifting of the blockade, and support an independent investigation into war crimes committed by all sides. It would be extreme folly for the U.S. to become any more involved in the war than it already is, and it is long past time that it stop enabling an unnecessary and horrible war.