The US is getting embroiled in yet another Middle East conflict. It should increase pressure on Israel instead
- Written by Ben Rich, Senior Lecturer in History and International Relations, Curtin University
The United States is once again enmeshing itself in a rapidly escalating and unpredictable conflict in the Middle East with no clear off ramps.
On numerous occasions in the past two weeks, the US and UK (in a lesser role) have struck Yemeni Houthi militants[1] who have been targeting shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden[2] in protest at Israeli actions in the current Gaza war.
The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah (or “supporters of God”), are a militia group that has been at war with the Saudis and the central Yemeni government for most of the last decade. The group emerged in the 1990s from the indigenous Zaydi Shi'a sect of northern Yemen, motivated by grievances[3] about their community’s second-class status in Yemeni society.
They gained particular prominence in the wake of the Arab Spring, which weakened the already-fragile Yemeni state and provided them with an opportunity to seize the majority of the country before the Saudi-led intervention in 2015 attempted to push them back.
Read more: Why US strikes will only embolden the Houthis, not stop their attacks on ships in the Red Sea[4]
In recent months, the Houthis have positioned themselves as an external champion for the besieged Palestinian population, declaring[5]:
We will continue to prevent Israeli ships or those heading to the occupied Palestinian ports until the aggression and siege on Gaza stops.
It is clear the Houthis’ broader goal is to create uncertainty and risk in global trade[6]. Disrupting business as usual in this way ensures the ongoing war is felt globally, making it impossible for the major players to ignore or downplay, as has been the case in the past[7].
The depressing[8] history[9] of genocides[10], massacres[11] and episodes of ethnic cleansing[12] shows us that human rights violations on their own rarely motivate serious collective action. However, hit the international community where it hurts – in the wallet – and it is far more likely to pay attention and seek a negotiated resolution.
In essence, through economic warfare, the Houthis are seeking to elevate a moral crisis to a level that can’t be ignored.
Why the US is intervening
At a tactical level, the US reprisals against the Houthis are predictable and make sense. As the pre-eminent global naval power and guarantor of freedom of navigation[13], the US has long sought to ensure the free flow of oceanic trade.
Indeed, it has gained much experience protecting shipping in the region against a variety of state[14] and non-state[15] threats during times of international crisis and instability over the years.
As such, the US sees itself as obligated to respond against Houthi militancy threatening global shipping. To do anything else would be seen as abdicating its fundamental function in the liberal economic order, creating even further risk and uncertainty and threatening economic prosperity.
But as much as the US would like portray itself as an impartial force for stability in its response to the Houthi attacks, its overt commitment to effectively unlimited, no-strings-attached support[16] for Israel’s war in Gaza has only emboldened the Israeli Defence Forces in their actions.
Such support goes far beyond running diplomatic cover for Israel[17] in the United Nations. According to a Bloomberg News report, the Pentagon is actively restocking the munitions[18] Israel is using against Palestinians in the war.
Given the Houthis’ stated aims, one cannot separate Gaza from the Red Sea. The latter cannot be truly addressed without resolving the former, and a major component of resolving the war requires far stronger US pressure on Israel.
Read more: Where do Israel and Hamas get their weapons?[19]
Why US pressure on Israel would have more impact
In this regard, US claims it is powerless to rein in Israel[20] seem far from convincing when one examines the power dynamics between the two countries.
As a middle power[21] in the wider US-centric liberal international order, Israel certainly exercises more autonomy and agency than a simple client state.
At the same time, however, history has shown us[22] assertive US presidents are more than capable of reining in the excesses of Tel Aviv in short order.
What is lacking at this moment is not influence, but willpower, especially on the part of the current president, Joe Biden[23]. Biden has a demonstrated history of exceptional support for Israel beyond that of his own party. This includes[24] in his former role as vice president under Barack Obama.
For their part, the Houthis are battle-hardened by nearly a decade of war with the Saudis[25]. They have made something of an art of withstanding precision strikes using US-made munitions and guided by US-supplied intelligence[26].
As such, it is unlikely the current US strikes will halt the Houthis’ attacks on shipping vessels. The Houthis are also highly likely to continue to evolve their own tactics to account for US weapon superiority. Given this, they have significant incentive to escalate their attacks in defiance of US actions.
Read more: Why US strikes will only embolden the Houthis, not stop their attacks on ships in the Red Sea[27]
The Gaza war has already claimed the lives of more than 25,000 Palestinians – primarily civilians. The bombing has been more destructive[28] in its first 100 days than the razing of the Syrian city of Aleppo by the Assad regime from 2012–16, according to experts in mapping wartime damage.
As the conflict continues unabated and outrage continues to grow, it is likely the Houthis or other militant actors or even states will ramp up efforts to intervene, especially through unconventional methods.
In such a context, the US and UK strikes against the Houthis increasingly risk producing unintended consequences and spiralling out of control[29] towards an even more complex and broader regional crisis.
References
- ^ Yemeni Houthi militants (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ motivated by grievances (theconversation.com)
- ^ Why US strikes will only embolden the Houthis, not stop their attacks on ships in the Red Sea (theconversation.com)
- ^ declaring (www.nbcnews.com)
- ^ uncertainty and risk in global trade (apnews.com)
- ^ as has been the case in the past (www.un.org)
- ^ depressing (www.un.org)
- ^ history (cla.umn.edu)
- ^ genocides (time.com)
- ^ massacres (www.genocidewatch.com)
- ^ ethnic cleansing (www.hrw.org)
- ^ guarantor of freedom of navigation (www.nbr.org)
- ^ state (www.history.navy.mil)
- ^ non-state (2009-2017.state.gov)
- ^ effectively unlimited, no-strings-attached support (ny1.com)
- ^ diplomatic cover for Israel (www.reuters.com)
- ^ restocking the munitions (www.bloomberg.com)
- ^ Where do Israel and Hamas get their weapons? (theconversation.com)
- ^ US claims it is powerless to rein in Israel (jacobin.com)
- ^ middle power (www.mup.com.au)
- ^ history has shown us (www.nytimes.com)
- ^ especially on the part of the current president, Joe Biden (www.reuters.com)
- ^ includes (www.afr.com)
- ^ battle-hardened by nearly a decade of war with the Saudis (www.economist.com)
- ^ US-made munitions and guided by US-supplied intelligence (www.csis.org)
- ^ Why US strikes will only embolden the Houthis, not stop their attacks on ships in the Red Sea (theconversation.com)
- ^ more destructive (www.afr.com)
- ^ spiralling out of control (web.mit.edu)
Authors: Ben Rich, Senior Lecturer in History and International Relations, Curtin University
