The Houthis Are Showcasing America’s Decline*
Published in Gazeta.ru
(Russia) on 22 January 2024
by Vitaliy Ryumshin (link to original)
*Editor’s note: On March 4, 2022, Russia enacted a law that criminalizes public opposition to, or independent news reporting about, the war in Ukraine. The law makes it a crime to call the war a “war” rather than a “special military operation” on social media or in a news article or broadcast. The law is understood to penalize any language that “discredits” Russia’s use of its military in Ukraine, calls for sanctions or protests Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It punishes anyone found to spread “false information” about the invasion with up to 15 years in prison.
Vitaliy Ryumshin discusses why the U.S.-led operation in the Red Sea went wrong from the very start.
In recent weeks, the U.S. and the U.K. have conducted joint airstrikes against Houthi targets in Yemen. However, despite their efforts, the situation in the Red Sea remains essentially unchanged. Moreover, the missile strikes have only emboldened the Houthis, who are persisting with their attacks on commercial shipping. It seems that the situation is rapidly approaching a stalemate.
The military operation against the Houthis, which the U.S. boldly named “Operation Prosperity Guardian,” seemed like a bad idea when it was first announced last Dec. 18. The goal of the operation was simple — to protect the maritime trade route through the Suez Canal from rebel attacks in coordination with 20 other countries that joined the U.S.-led coalition.
However, it soon became apparent that only a few coalition members were ready to offer tangible help to the U.S., as only the U.K., Greece and Denmark sent warships to the region. In contrast, the contributions from most other members amounted to comically small military contingents of two to 11 people.
Needless to say, this limited involvement of the U.S. and its allies did not deter the Houthis at all. The rebels continued to attack commercial shipping despite the fact their drones and missiles were shot down and many of their boats were destroyed. The strikes on military facilities in Yemen also achieved very little, although the Americans claimed to have destroyed a quarter of the Houthis’ missile and drone-launching capabilities. Against this background, the White House decision to relist the rebels as a specially designated global terrorist group and call the move a “pliable form of economic pressure” looked frankly ridiculous.
At the same time, from a purely economic point of view, the operation is not going in favor of the allies. They are forced to use expensive, piecemeal weapons to strike numerous cheap missiles and drones. For instance, the French navy, which operates in the Red Sea independently of the U.S.-led coalition, now uses missiles worth about $1 million to shoot down drones that cost around $20,000. The U.K. is doing the same thing — and its only destroyer in the Red Sea, the HMS Diamond, will soon run out of ammunition and be forced to go off duty.
Of course, reinforcements will arrive soon, as the EU is discussing sending its own naval mission to the Red Sea. These reinforcements will undoubtedly help protect maritime trade for some time, but they will not radically change the overall situation — for this, a different approach is required.
In principle, an obvious solution to the problem allies face is a full-scale invasion of Yemen to defeat the Houthis completely. But such an invasion requires vast resources, the support of regional allies and political will.
The U.S.-led coalition’s resources are scarce, with Americans struggling to concentrate military power in one place, torn between Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Moreover, the U.S. has been unable to carry out rotations in its Middle East fleet for months because of a shortage of sailors, which is a serious indicator of its limited capabilities. The U.K. is doing even worse — in recent years; the Royal Navy has shrunk so much that London has been unable to send even a single aircraft carrier to the Red Sea. As such, the U.K. is forced to launch strikes on Yemen from an airbase in Cyprus.
The allies can’t count on the support of their regional partners either. Indeed, the involvement of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are active participants in Yemen’s civil war on the side of anti-Houthi forces, would greatly help the U.S. However, despite all American attempts to engage them, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have shied away from the conflict for fear of being seen as allies of Israel in the eyes of other Arab states. The same goes for Egypt, even though, as the owner of the Suez Canal, it should be most interested in ensuring that traffic can once again move safely through the waterway.
As such, without resources and key allies, Washington consequently lacks the political will to escalate the conflict in the Red Sea. So, the option of military intervention in Yemen can be put aside.
As a possible alternative to a full-scale invasion of Yemen, Americans could withdraw from the conflict altogether. However, before doing so, Joe Biden would need to find a convincing explanation for why the world’s strongest army is abandoning its allies in distress and backing down before an Iranian proxy (not even Iran itself). Otherwise, in a way that is similar to the aftermath of the Afghanistan withdrawal, the U.S. president will suffer a substantial reputational blow. In turn, this would give the Republicans a way to finish off Biden in time for the presidential election, which is less than a year away.
It is also possible for the U.S. to force Israel to stop its operation in Gaza, as the Houthis are demanding. However, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is only ready to reduce the intensity of hostilities rather than completely withdraw from Gaza. And the U.S. president is too strongly tied to the pro-Israeli lobby to increase pressure on his ally.
So, what conclusions can we draw here? Clearly, the conflict with the Houthis shows that the role of “global policeman” is becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. Previously, Washington had enough power to intervene at the drop of a hat to subdue its adversaries. Now, America’s threats are ignored, even when it directly enters a conflict. And after a disastrous campaign like the one unfolding in the Red Sea, other countries will rely on America’s judgment even less. Perhaps this will be the beginning of the post-American world order.
The author expresses a personal opinion that may not reflect the views of Gazeta.ru’s editorial board.
Vitaliy Ryumshin discusses why the U.S.-led operation in the Red Sea went wrong from the very start.
In recent weeks, the U.S. and the U.K. have conducted joint airstrikes against Houthi targets in Yemen. However, despite their efforts, the situation in the Red Sea remains essentially unchanged. Moreover, the missile strikes have only emboldened the Houthis, who are persisting with their attacks on commercial shipping. It seems that the situation is rapidly approaching a stalemate.
The military operation against the Houthis, which the U.S. boldly named “Operation Prosperity Guardian,” seemed like a bad idea when it was first announced last Dec. 18. The goal of the operation was simple — to protect the maritime trade route through the Suez Canal from rebel attacks in coordination with 20 other countries that joined the U.S.-led coalition.
However, it soon became apparent that only a few coalition members were ready to offer tangible help to the U.S., as only the U.K., Greece and Denmark sent warships to the region. In contrast, the contributions from most other members amounted to comically small military contingents of two to 11 people.
Needless to say, this limited involvement of the U.S. and its allies did not deter the Houthis at all. The rebels continued to attack commercial shipping despite the fact their drones and missiles were shot down and many of their boats were destroyed. The strikes on military facilities in Yemen also achieved very little, although the Americans claimed to have destroyed a quarter of the Houthis’ missile and drone-launching capabilities. Against this background, the White House decision to relist the rebels as a specially designated global terrorist group and call the move a “pliable form of economic pressure” looked frankly ridiculous.
At the same time, from a purely economic point of view, the operation is not going in favor of the allies. They are forced to use expensive, piecemeal weapons to strike numerous cheap missiles and drones. For instance, the French navy, which operates in the Red Sea independently of the U.S.-led coalition, now uses missiles worth about $1 million to shoot down drones that cost around $20,000. The U.K. is doing the same thing — and its only destroyer in the Red Sea, the HMS Diamond, will soon run out of ammunition and be forced to go off duty.
Of course, reinforcements will arrive soon, as the EU is discussing sending its own naval mission to the Red Sea. These reinforcements will undoubtedly help protect maritime trade for some time, but they will not radically change the overall situation — for this, a different approach is required.
In principle, an obvious solution to the problem allies face is a full-scale invasion of Yemen to defeat the Houthis completely. But such an invasion requires vast resources, the support of regional allies and political will.
The U.S.-led coalition’s resources are scarce, with Americans struggling to concentrate military power in one place, torn between Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Moreover, the U.S. has been unable to carry out rotations in its Middle East fleet for months because of a shortage of sailors, which is a serious indicator of its limited capabilities. The U.K. is doing even worse — in recent years; the Royal Navy has shrunk so much that London has been unable to send even a single aircraft carrier to the Red Sea. As such, the U.K. is forced to launch strikes on Yemen from an airbase in Cyprus.
The allies can’t count on the support of their regional partners either. Indeed, the involvement of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are active participants in Yemen’s civil war on the side of anti-Houthi forces, would greatly help the U.S. However, despite all American attempts to engage them, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have shied away from the conflict for fear of being seen as allies of Israel in the eyes of other Arab states. The same goes for Egypt, even though, as the owner of the Suez Canal, it should be most interested in ensuring that traffic can once again move safely through the waterway.
As such, without resources and key allies, Washington consequently lacks the political will to escalate the conflict in the Red Sea. So, the option of military intervention in Yemen can be put aside.
As a possible alternative to a full-scale invasion of Yemen, Americans could withdraw from the conflict altogether. However, before doing so, Joe Biden would need to find a convincing explanation for why the world’s strongest army is abandoning its allies in distress and backing down before an Iranian proxy (not even Iran itself). Otherwise, in a way that is similar to the aftermath of the Afghanistan withdrawal, the U.S. president will suffer a substantial reputational blow. In turn, this would give the Republicans a way to finish off Biden in time for the presidential election, which is less than a year away.
It is also possible for the U.S. to force Israel to stop its operation in Gaza, as the Houthis are demanding. However, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is only ready to reduce the intensity of hostilities rather than completely withdraw from Gaza. And the U.S. president is too strongly tied to the pro-Israeli lobby to increase pressure on his ally.
So, what conclusions can we draw here? Clearly, the conflict with the Houthis shows that the role of “global policeman” is becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. Previously, Washington had enough power to intervene at the drop of a hat to subdue its adversaries. Now, America’s threats are ignored, even when it directly enters a conflict. And after a disastrous campaign like the one unfolding in the Red Sea, other countries will rely on America’s judgment even less. Perhaps this will be the beginning of the post-American world order.
The author expresses a personal opinion that may not reflect the views of Gazeta.ru’s editorial board.
Previous article![]( "In His 1st Term, Trump Made 30,573 False Statements")
Next article![]( "Canada-US Relations Need To Remain Authentic – Otherwise, the Americans Will See Right Through Us")
