Just on a geostrategic level, I’m actually surprised Iran has supplied the Houthi with such a large inventory and supported their attacks. Shutting down the Straits of Hormuz and making shipping...
Just on a geostrategic level, I’m actually surprised Iran has supplied the Houthi with such a large inventory and supported their attacks. Shutting down the Straits of Hormuz and making shipping impossible in the Persian Gulf is the ultimate trump card Iran possesses.
For centuries, Iran and its predecessors have been known as clever, patient, and tactical actors in international relations. But this feels like the same kind of misstep Russia made with their natural gas blackmail of Europe. Instead of achieving their goals, Europe quickly developed alternative sources… permanently.
By only unleashing minimal random attacks, instead of it being a shot across the bow like Iran and the Houthi think it is, it just gives the regional infrastructure time to adapt to the new reality. No insurer will cover ships in the region now and other routes are being used. Although far more expensive and complicated, they are preferential to having your cargo sunk.
If this conflict becomes a full-blown hot war, Iran will find itself unable to escalate and they will already be isolated.
All that said, this conflict escalating would be a nightmare of a major war and I pray that we step back from the brink.
I think it's a mistake to assume that the actions of ones opponents are not strategically sound. For example unlike many people I wouldn't say Putin is mad, or uncalculating. The Russians...
For centuries, Iran and its predecessors have been known as clever, patient, and tactical actors in international relations. But this feels like the same kind of misstep
I think it's a mistake to assume that the actions of ones opponents are not strategically sound. For example unlike many people I wouldn't say Putin is mad, or uncalculating. The Russians certainly messed up their original invasion, but if you look at how it is progressing the most likely outcome is that Russia will be able to conquer a very large proportion of Ukraine as western support flails. They've also done astoundingly well at some things, such as keeping their currency alive and preventing their domestic economy from totally collapsing.
No insurer will cover ships in the region now and other routes are being used. Although far more expensive and complicated, they are preferential to having your cargo sunk.
Gas is totally different to shipping routes because one is a commodity and the other is – not? The Houthis always have the option of dialling things back down, allowing shipping to pass, and then threatning to disrupt it again. I think the Iranian goal (and they have succeeded here) is trying to get the US actively drawn into the current conflict in the Middle East.
The official Houthi slogan is literally 'God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam' so I do not see how bombing them will make the US more...
The official Houthi slogan is literally 'God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam' so I do not see how bombing them will make the US more enemies. That statement is self-explanatory and at the absolute peak of genocidal hatred.
Iran will either continue to arm their proxies or lose them.
Foreign policy is not a popularity contest, but soft power matters and hatred of the US and Israel constrains what Arab leaders can say and do.
According to the poll conducted by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 95% of Saudis did not believe that Hamas killed civilians in its attacks on Israel. There's no wiggle room with that kind of statistic. Israel is hated for existing, Arab leaders are not less constrained now than they were before. I suspect they try to work around the popularity problem.
And I see another side to this story. Because of Israel's response in Gaza, the Saudis now have the world's most powerful air force bombing their enemy to the south. They didn't have to say anything, they didn't have to do anything.
I think the obvious answer here is that this descends into a hot war, legitimises the Houthis (in domestic Yemeni politics which are so fiendishly complicated that I don't really understand them),...
The official Houthi slogan is literally 'God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam' so I do not see how bombing them will make the US more enemies. That statement is self-explanatory and at the absolute peak of genocidal hatred.
I think the obvious answer here is that this descends into a hot war, legitimises the Houthis (in domestic Yemeni politics which are so fiendishly complicated that I don't really understand them), and if this happens lots of countries will blame the US. It's important to seperate rhetoric from actions in foreign policy. Of course rhetoric serves a purpose in signalling things to other actors, but it is also often performative for domestic purposes.
I suspect Saudi leaders and their proxies secretly appreciate this development. After all, Saudi Arabia has been leading a coalition made up of Egypt, Jordan, Sudan, and Bahrain against the Houthi in Yemen since 2015. And this is also nothing new.
I think the Saudis are probably pretty upset. Saudi military action in Yemen has failed pretty decisively, and they are bleeding something like US$25bn per year on it for very limited gains (except an extremely severe death toll). Combined with the Houthi ability to seriously disrupt Saudi oil production (at one point in 2019 iirc they disabled 50% of Saudi oil production). At this point the Saudis seem pretty ready to throw in the towel – sign a peace deal with the Houthis, shower them in some cash, and continue to make money.
Further, the "coalition" has (even 2023) fallen apart as part of the wider Saudi/UAE split, as part of which the UAE has (at a slightly reductionist level) started backing the STC as a breakaway group and the Saudis the official government.
The proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been going on since 1979 and with the actions of the Iranian proxies, Israel and Saudi Arabia's goals converge. There is more pressure on Iran.
I think this was true, but now towards sentiment towards Israel in the Arab world is (unsurprisingly) even more negative than it already was given that ~27,000 civilians (out of ~30,000 total deaths) have been killed by the IDF. The Saudis have to navigate this popular domestic sentiment to remain in power, and being friends with Israel is not a good policy option for the Saudis in the present moment – especially as Netanyahu seems determined to turn the Hamas attacks (for which he is kind of responsible, having moved troops away from Gaza to protect his friends in the West Bank and his previous long-term partnership with Hamas) into a wider Middle East conflict.
... And I see another side to this story. Because of Israel's response in Gaza, the Saudis now have the world's most powerful air force bombing their enemy to the south. They didn't have to say anything, they didn't have to do anything.
Except that the Saudi peace deal with the Houthis (which realistically was probably going to last a couple of years and then collapse – but at least it would last a year or two) is now off the table. The US is unlikely (without a ground invasion) to be able to cripple the Houthis militarily, given that years and years of Saudi bombing have had fairly limited impact. This also creates the risk of a hot war (rather than the Houthis playing pirates) which would seriously disrupt shipping, and create a lot of headaches for Saudi Arabia.
all emphasis mine, and I think those parts are really important
all emphasis mine, and I think those parts are really important
Drawing fire from the “Great Satan,” as America is known in Iran’s so-called axis of resistance, under the guise of fighting for the Palestinian cause will have been part of the Houthi game plan. The Houthis have now pledged a response, declaring all US and UK interests fair game, and it would be “foolish,” to use their word, to doubt them. Like Hamas, the Houthis are very bad at governing and unpopular in peace time. This fight is expected to raise their status at home and abroad.
The Rand Paul-connected US think tank Defense Priorities is as reliable as a stopped clock in its opposition to the use of US military force abroad, but this is one occasion where its skepticism happens to be right. “In underlining their claim to be battling Israel and its US backers in defense of Gaza, the airstrikes may actually be welcomed by Houthi leaders,” and as they double down, invite further US escalation, the think tank’s policy director Benjamin H. Friedman said in a statement Friday morning. Moreover, the actual threat being responded to was not that crippling to world trade. “The fact is that the Houthi attacks on shipping have not been particularly effective, nor are they a major economic issue.”
Foreign policy is not a popularity contest, but soft power matters and hatred of the US and Israel constrains what Arab leaders can say and do. There remains no evidence that Iran instigated Hamas’s Oct. 7 savagery, but it has so far been a beneficiary of the Israeli and US responses. No matter the verdict, the fact that Israel — of all countries — is now on trial for alleged genocide at the UN’s International Court of Justice in the Hague is another win for opponents of the Jewish state.
Well it kind of is? International opinion does not support disrupting major shipping routes. The Houthis are looking for an excuse for a conflict in order to remain in power despite their lack of...
The article acknowledges that doing nothing is not an option.
Well it kind of is? International opinion does not support disrupting major shipping routes. The Houthis are looking for an excuse for a conflict in order to remain in power despite their lack of domestic popularity. The US could push Israel to dial back on its chaotic, unplanned and disproportionate campaign in Gaza, which is essentially the only lever they can pull to reduce regional tensions.
Iran has much to lose as well if this escalates in an unpredictable way for them
If this escalates it will shut down a vital shipping artery. Iran is already so sanctioned that they probably don't care about this, but it has the potential to tank the economy and move (notoriously fickle and irrational) US voters to elect Trump. Unless the US decides to invade Iran, or otherwise intervene militarily (unlikely) in Iran I think they probably don't care.
I think that might be a way of saying there aren't any good options? Just less-bad ones. The argument seems to be that getting bombed by the US will make the Houthis more popular and the US less...
I think that might be a way of saying there aren't any good options? Just less-bad ones.
The argument seems to be that getting bombed by the US will make the Houthis more popular and the US less popular in the Middle East generally. I have no idea what the "Arab street" thinks and I'd want more evidence of that.
Just on a geostrategic level, I’m actually surprised Iran has supplied the Houthi with such a large inventory and supported their attacks. Shutting down the Straits of Hormuz and making shipping impossible in the Persian Gulf is the ultimate trump card Iran possesses.
For centuries, Iran and its predecessors have been known as clever, patient, and tactical actors in international relations. But this feels like the same kind of misstep Russia made with their natural gas blackmail of Europe. Instead of achieving their goals, Europe quickly developed alternative sources… permanently.
By only unleashing minimal random attacks, instead of it being a shot across the bow like Iran and the Houthi think it is, it just gives the regional infrastructure time to adapt to the new reality. No insurer will cover ships in the region now and other routes are being used. Although far more expensive and complicated, they are preferential to having your cargo sunk.
If this conflict becomes a full-blown hot war, Iran will find itself unable to escalate and they will already be isolated.
All that said, this conflict escalating would be a nightmare of a major war and I pray that we step back from the brink.
I think it's a mistake to assume that the actions of ones opponents are not strategically sound. For example unlike many people I wouldn't say Putin is mad, or uncalculating. The Russians certainly messed up their original invasion, but if you look at how it is progressing the most likely outcome is that Russia will be able to conquer a very large proportion of Ukraine as western support flails. They've also done astoundingly well at some things, such as keeping their currency alive and preventing their domestic economy from totally collapsing.
Gas is totally different to shipping routes because one is a commodity and the other is – not? The Houthis always have the option of dialling things back down, allowing shipping to pass, and then threatning to disrupt it again. I think the Iranian goal (and they have succeeded here) is trying to get the US actively drawn into the current conflict in the Middle East.
The official Houthi slogan is literally 'God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam' so I do not see how bombing them will make the US more enemies. That statement is self-explanatory and at the absolute peak of genocidal hatred.
I suspect Saudi leaders and their proxies secretly appreciate this development. After all, Saudi Arabia has been leading a coalition made up of Egypt, Jordan, Sudan, and Bahrain against the Houthi in Yemen since 2015. And this is also nothing new. The proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been going on since 1979 and with the actions of the Iranian proxies, Israel and Saudi Arabia's goals converge. There is more pressure on Iran.
Iran will either continue to arm their proxies or lose them.
According to the poll conducted by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 95% of Saudis did not believe that Hamas killed civilians in its attacks on Israel. There's no wiggle room with that kind of statistic. Israel is hated for existing, Arab leaders are not less constrained now than they were before. I suspect they try to work around the popularity problem.
And I see another side to this story. Because of Israel's response in Gaza, the Saudis now have the world's most powerful air force bombing their enemy to the south. They didn't have to say anything, they didn't have to do anything.
I think the obvious answer here is that this descends into a hot war, legitimises the Houthis (in domestic Yemeni politics which are so fiendishly complicated that I don't really understand them), and if this happens lots of countries will blame the US. It's important to seperate rhetoric from actions in foreign policy. Of course rhetoric serves a purpose in signalling things to other actors, but it is also often performative for domestic purposes.
I think the Saudis are probably pretty upset. Saudi military action in Yemen has failed pretty decisively, and they are bleeding something like US$25bn per year on it for very limited gains (except an extremely severe death toll). Combined with the Houthi ability to seriously disrupt Saudi oil production (at one point in 2019 iirc they disabled 50% of Saudi oil production). At this point the Saudis seem pretty ready to throw in the towel – sign a peace deal with the Houthis, shower them in some cash, and continue to make money.
Further, the "coalition" has (even 2023) fallen apart as part of the wider Saudi/UAE split, as part of which the UAE has (at a slightly reductionist level) started backing the STC as a breakaway group and the Saudis the official government.
I think this was true, but now towards sentiment towards Israel in the Arab world is (unsurprisingly) even more negative than it already was given that ~27,000 civilians (out of ~30,000 total deaths) have been killed by the IDF. The Saudis have to navigate this popular domestic sentiment to remain in power, and being friends with Israel is not a good policy option for the Saudis in the present moment – especially as Netanyahu seems determined to turn the Hamas attacks (for which he is kind of responsible, having moved troops away from Gaza to protect his friends in the West Bank and his previous long-term partnership with Hamas) into a wider Middle East conflict.
Except that the Saudi peace deal with the Houthis (which realistically was probably going to last a couple of years and then collapse – but at least it would last a year or two) is now off the table. The US is unlikely (without a ground invasion) to be able to cripple the Houthis militarily, given that years and years of Saudi bombing have had fairly limited impact. This also creates the risk of a hot war (rather than the Houthis playing pirates) which would seriously disrupt shipping, and create a lot of headaches for Saudi Arabia.
all emphasis mine, and I think those parts are really important
Well it kind of is? International opinion does not support disrupting major shipping routes. The Houthis are looking for an excuse for a conflict in order to remain in power despite their lack of domestic popularity. The US could push Israel to dial back on its chaotic, unplanned and disproportionate campaign in Gaza, which is essentially the only lever they can pull to reduce regional tensions.
If this escalates it will shut down a vital shipping artery. Iran is already so sanctioned that they probably don't care about this, but it has the potential to tank the economy and move (notoriously fickle and irrational) US voters to elect Trump. Unless the US decides to invade Iran, or otherwise intervene militarily (unlikely) in Iran I think they probably don't care.
I think that might be a way of saying there aren't any good options? Just less-bad ones.
The argument seems to be that getting bombed by the US will make the Houthis more popular and the US less popular in the Middle East generally. I have no idea what the "Arab street" thinks and I'd want more evidence of that.