Tweet Share Share Comment

After the U.S.-British air and naval strikes on Yemen on Thursday night, the Middle East is even messier than it may seem.

President Joe Biden and his allies (a smaller coalition than he was hoping to rally) had good reason to launch the attack. Since November, Houthi militias, which control much of Yemen, have fired more than 100 drones and missiles at 27 commercial vessels—affecting the trade of 50 countries—in the Red Sea, passageway for 20 percent of the world’s container shipping.

The Houthis’ most recent strike, on Tuesday, had been a coordinated salvo of 21 drones and missiles at commercial and military ships. U.S. Navy crews were able to shoot down all the weapons, but some came close. In any case, protecting navigation of the seas is an age-old, legitimate military mission. Before Tuesday’s strike, the U.S. and 13 other countries had formally warned the Houthis they would face “consequences” if they continued attacking ships. The U.N. Security Council also condemned the Houthi attacks.

Yet at the same time, the Biden-led attack—which involved ships, submarines, and aircraft firing more than 100 highly accurate missiles at more than 60 Houthi targets across at least 16 locations in Yemen, including the capital, Sanaa—could escalate and widen the ongoing conflicts in the region. At the very least, it will further embroil the United States in the war and complicate the prospects of a peace.

The strikes—which officials say were aimed at radars, missile factories and depots, command-control facilities, and drone launch sites—were meant to “degrade” Houthi capabilities to attack more ships. The officials did not claim that the strikes would “destroy” all of their capabilities; they said it was likely that the Houthis would retaliate in some form, in which case the U.S. would respond accordingly. It is not yet known how effective the strike was—it takes hours, sometimes days, for military intelligence to conduct “bomb-damage assessment.” Houthi officials claimed the attack killed five militiamen and injured six. They said nothing about civilian casualties, which suggests there were probably few, if any.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Houthis are a Shiite sect that overthrew the Yemeni government in 2014 and have been waging a civil war ever since, with steadily increasing support from Iran and against steadily diminishing resistance from Saudi Arabia. The support from Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah—in weapons, training, and intelligence—has made Houthi fighters, which were once a ragtag militia just loosely allied with Iran, quite skillful and sophisticated, a full partner in the Iran-led “axis of resistance.” It has also made the Houthis’ leaders more radical and ambitious.

In the past year, they have tried to cast themselves as not only rebels against Yemen’s Saudi-backed regime (which, though deposed, is still recognized by most countries as the legitimate government) but also as a leader of jihad, a “Southern Hezbollah,” as Michael Knights of the Washington institute has put it. Their slogan: “Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse the Jews, Victory to Islam!”

Advertisement

They have justified their attacks on ships in the Red Sea as retaliation to Israel’s killings of civilians in Gaza. U.S. officials say many of the ships attacked had nothing to do with Israel and weren’t steaming to or from Israeli ports. Data from MariTrace, a maritime-intelligence firm, supports this claim. Reports, which I have seen, on 13 of the ships attacked by Houthis indicates that none of them had any ties to Israel. Another sign that the Houthi justification is false: The militias started militarizing islands in the Red Sea before Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

Advertisement

However, since Oct. 7, the Houthis have played up the anti-Israeli angle and have portrayed their fight as God’s quest for liberation of Mecca and Jerusalem. Nadwa Dawsari, a fellow at the Middle East Institute with 20 years of field experience, tweeted Thursday night, shortly after the airstrikes:

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Houthis have been desperately waiting to engage with “America and Israel” for 20 years. Since Oct 7, they recruited [45,000] fighters for the “battle of promised conquest & holy Jihad.” Today the US & UK made their dream come true.

According to Elisabeth Kendall, an Arabist and Middle East specialist at Cambridge University, the post-Oct. 7 surge gave Houthi leaders a chance to distract attention from their own failure at governing Yemen. Before, they blamed the country’s poverty and their corruption on the war with Saudi Arabia—a less convincing ploy since a cease-fire was negotiated last year. Now they can blame their problems on, and rally the population around, a war with Israel.

Still, Kendall observed in an essay posted just hours before Thursday’s U.S.-British airstrikes, “It makes little sense for the Houthis to risk their hard-won military gains—territory, power, and recognition—by provoking America to unleash its might against them.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Now that America has unleashed its might, what happens next? For the moment, the Houthis are reveling in their new status as their devils’ target. Tens of thousands of Yemenis filled the streets of their capital Friday morning in protest of the airstrikes and in support of the Houthis. (The brutality of the Houthis’ rule has led some to wonder whether displays of popular allegiance are based on loyalty or fear. Quite often, an attack by a big foreign power can boost loyalty, even among the subjects of a repressive regime.)

The Houthis have vowed to respond to the strikes, perhaps by going after more ships or by attacking American or British targets. Either way, the U.S. will retaliate to that by striking more Houthi targets, which might dampen war fevers or inflame them—it’s hard to predict.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Much depends on how the neighboring states respond. Bahrain was the only Middle Eastern country in the 13-nation coalition that warned the Houthis not to attack any more ships. Saudi Arabia’s leaders Friday morning urged “restraint,” without specifying on whom. They have no desire to reignite a nine-year war against the Houthis that they thought would be a cakewalk but wound up severely damaging Riyadh’s economy and reputation. Egypt has said nothing, even though it risks losing $12 billion in fees that it had hoped to earn this year from international shippers, many of whom are now avoiding the Red Sea. Its president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who is taking enough risks trying to compel Hamas to negotiate a truce and free hostages, has no desire to incite more pro-Palestine passions.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Iran is, true to form, the wild card. The mullahs of Tehran have walked a tightrope in dealing with the war in Gaza. They declared support for Hamas while publicly disavowing any role in the Oct. 7 attack. They have tightened the leash on their other terrorist ally, Hezbollah, letting them lob just enough rockets into northern Israel to make a statement but not so many as to foment a major retaliation either from Israel or from the U.S. warships in the Mediterranean.

Baraa Shaiban, a Yemeni analyst, wrote in the journal RUSI in December that the Houthis’ attacks in the Red Sea, which had just begun, could provide a “face-saving display, showing that Iran is finding other ways to support its allies in Gaza.” The Houthis’ weapons came entirely from Iran and “will likely continue to flow,” an “arrangement” that “serves both the Houthis and the Iranians,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Related From Slate

Fred Kaplan

America Is Struggling on the World Stage. There’s a Very Bad Lesson to Take From That.

Read More

If the Houthis continue to attack ships in the Red Sea, or escalate their attacks against other targets in the region, and the U.S. responds by stepping up its attacks on Yemen, will the Iranians continue the arrangement—or will they clamp down on the Houthis, as they have on Hezbollah, for fear of sparking, and becoming complicit in, a wider war? If they do order a clamp down, will the Houthis obey—or will they go with their own interests, however riskily calculated? As Kendall writes, the Houthi leaders really do believe God is on their side, which can complicate the plans of more pragmatic supporters of jihad.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

It’s likely that Biden decided to attack the Houthi targets in Yemen knowing that he had no good options.

Advertisement

Popular in News & Politics

  1. Trump Judge Spanks Ron DeSantis for Retaliating Against a Democratic Rival
  2. Forget Democrats and Republicans. There Are 16 Gangs That Really Rule American Politics.
  3. The Fox News Town Hall Revealed There’s One Issue Left Trump Can’t Simply Bluster His Way Through
  4. Bill Ackman Took on Plagiarism. Then Plagiarism Came for His Wife.

But Bruce Riedel, a former Middle East analyst at the CIA and author of the 2023 book America and the Yemens, sees one possible way out of this: ”an immediate ceasefire in Gaza,” he said over email—which, he added, would be “good for its own reasons.” Whatever the Houthis’ real motive in attacking ships, they say they’re retaliating to Israel’s bombing of Gaza—so a cease-fire in Gaza might compel them to hold fire in the Red Sea. (Then again, they might come up with another excuse for attacking vessels.)

The conflict in the Red Sea might have started out as something separate from the war in Gaza, and the Biden administration very much wants to keep them separate. But the two wars are now joined, for better or for worse.

A cease-fire—especially if attached to a deal where Hamas frees the hostages and Israel at least embarks upon negotiations on a Palestinian state—would require Biden and his team to exert enormous pressure on all the neighboring leaders, with whom they have been engaged in shuttle and telephone diplomacy almost constantly for the past two months. This would include, very much, perhaps most of all, pressure on Israel. This may be the hardest step of all, but this may be the only alternative to inexorable escalation to a wider, deeper, longer war.

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - This May Be the Only Way to Avoid a Broader Regional War in the Middle East - Fred Kaplan
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

This May Be the Only Way to Avoid a Broader Regional War in the Middle East

13 6
13.01.2024
Tweet Share Share Comment

After the U.S.-British air and naval strikes on Yemen on Thursday night, the Middle East is even messier than it may seem.

President Joe Biden and his allies (a smaller coalition than he was hoping to rally) had good reason to launch the attack. Since November, Houthi militias, which control much of Yemen, have fired more than 100 drones and missiles at 27 commercial vessels—affecting the trade of 50 countries—in the Red Sea, passageway for 20 percent of the world’s container shipping.

The Houthis’ most recent strike, on Tuesday, had been a coordinated salvo of 21 drones and missiles at commercial and military ships. U.S. Navy crews were able to shoot down all the weapons, but some came close. In any case, protecting navigation of the seas is an age-old, legitimate military mission. Before Tuesday’s strike, the U.S. and 13 other countries had formally warned the Houthis they would face “consequences” if they continued attacking ships. The U.N. Security Council also condemned the Houthi attacks.

Yet at the same time, the Biden-led attack—which involved ships, submarines, and aircraft firing more than 100 highly accurate missiles at more than 60 Houthi targets across at least 16 locations in Yemen, including the capital, Sanaa—could escalate and widen the ongoing conflicts in the region. At the very least, it will further embroil the United States in the war and complicate the prospects of a peace.

The strikes—which officials say were aimed at radars, missile factories and depots, command-control facilities, and drone launch sites—were meant to “degrade” Houthi capabilities to attack more ships. The officials did not claim that the strikes would “destroy” all of their capabilities; they said it was likely that the Houthis would retaliate in some form, in which case the U.S. would respond accordingly. It is not yet known how effective the strike was—it takes hours, sometimes days, for military intelligence to conduct “bomb-damage assessment.” Houthi officials claimed the attack killed five militiamen and injured six. They said nothing about civilian casualties, which suggests there were probably few, if any.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Houthis are a Shiite sect that overthrew the Yemeni government in 2014 and have been waging a civil war ever since, with steadily increasing support from Iran and against steadily diminishing resistance from Saudi Arabia. The support from Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah—in weapons, training, and intelligence—has made Houthi fighters, which were once a ragtag militia........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play