As Houthis grab Bab al-Mandeb, US appears willing to watch from sidelines | Houthis News

United States officials met Houthi representatives at the US embassy in the Omani capital, Muscat, over the weekend after the Iran-aligned movement seized thousands of square kilometres of territory in just a few days.

With strategically important islands and large stretches of Yemen’s Red Sea coast now under Houthi control, the group has tightened its grip on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait – a crucial chokepoint for global shipping and energy supplies.

During the talks, the Houthis assured US officials that they had no intention of attacking US shipping in the Red Sea, saying their restrictions would apply only to vessels linked to Saudi Arabia.

But that would still leave two of the world’s most important shipping routes facing serious disruption, with traffic through the Strait of Hormuz restricted for the past six months. Any further disruption could drive global oil and consumer prices even higher, creating another political headache for US President Donald Trump ahead of midterm elections in November.

With the Houthis’ history of attacking commercial vessels, their ties to Iran and their deep ideological opposition to the US, some experts question how far their assurances can be trusted. But some analysts say Washington may have little choice but to take the group at its word, at least for now. US military resources are reportedly depleted and growing domestic opposition to the Iran war have all limited Washington’s ability – and willingness – to open another front in Yemen.

Pressure to intervene

As the Houthis seized territory in southwestern Yemen, the US publication Axios reported that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman called Donald Trump twice last week, urging him to launch strikes against the group – but the US president refused.

Admiral Brad Cooper, the commander of US Central Command, subsequently travelled to Riyadh for urgent coordination talks with the crown prince. The visit suggested Washington was seeking to intensify support for Saudi Arabia while avoiding direct military involvement.

Trump also attempted to reassure Riyadh, describing the crown prince as a “good friend” and promising that “everything will work out very well”.

But he offered no specific military commitment and the White House announced no explicit guarantee that the US would defend Saudi energy infrastructure or shipping routes.

Axios also reported that the military chiefs of Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt attended a private gathering convened by the US.

While the US has avoided intervening, Israel, whose ships and territory have previously been targeted by the Houthis, has reportedly offered to intervene in Yemen on Saudi Arabia’s behalf. Simon Mabon, a professor of international relations at Lancaster University, however, said any Israeli involvement would probably be limited.

“With elections coming up [in Israel], there comes a point when there is overreach,” Mabon told Al Jazeera. “In light of Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and the West Bank – as well as the question marks over Iran – Yemen could be a bridge too far.” Experts also say that the Saudis may be wary of being seen to rely on Israeli military support, particularly amid the war on Gaza, because doing so could damage Riyadh’s standing and legitimacy throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds.

Washington’s reluctance to act could deepen Saudi concerns about its longstanding security relationship with the US. “This is another instance of the United States failing to fulfil its role as a security guarantor,” Mabon said. “That will start to add up and create serious doubts in Saudi Arabia about whether it can rely on the United States.”

The kingdom began diversifying its relationships after attacks on its oil infrastructure in 2018 and 2019 exposed the limits of US security guarantees. Last September, it signed a mutual defence agreement with Pakistan, stipulating that an attack on either country would be treated as an attack on both. Riyadh expanded that emerging security arrangement last month by signing the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement with Pakistan and Turkiye, under which an armed attack against any of the three would be regarded as an attack against them all.

Mabon said the latest crisis was unlikely to produce a complete break with Washington, but could accelerate Riyadh’s efforts to build closer ties elsewhere.

“We are already seeing a diversification of security portfolios,” he said. “The Saudis are starting to believe that they cannot rely on the United States all the time, which is why we saw the agreement with Turkey and Pakistan.”

Why the US wants to stay out

Washington is already embroiled in an expensive and resource-intensive war with Iran, the Houthis’ principal regional backer. Trump entered that conflict expecting it to end within days. More than six months later, the war remains unresolved, oil prices are higher and the administration has yet to set out a clear route towards ending it.

Opening another front in Yemen would risk repeating that experience at a particularly difficult moment for Trump’s Republican Party. A new campaign in Yemen could complicate closely contested House and Senate races, especially after Trump built his presidential campaign around the promise to end US involvement in “forever wars”. A Reuters/Ipsos poll published last month found that just 31 percent of Americans supported US military action against Iran, down from 37 percent in March, while 83 percent expected the conflict to continue for an extended period.

“The elections in November are hugely significant,” Mabon said. “Republicans will be anxious about all of this. Opening a new front in what could potentially become another forever war would be deeply unpopular.”

It is questionable whether the US has the military resources required to sustain another operation. Reports emerged in July that supplies of some critical munitions, particularly long-range missiles and Patriot interceptors, were running low. Those concerns coincided with Washington halting attacks on Iran.

A Pentagon watchdog report published this week found that the first four months of the war cost $33bn, including $22bn in expended munitions. It also revealed that dozens of aircraft had been lost or damaged, hundreds of buildings and structures hit and Iranian attacks caused an estimated $184m in damage to US diplomatic facilities.

The Trump administration has denied that the US is running short of weapons, insisting that it retains “massive amounts” of weaponry.

But about 50 military officers and civilian officials working with the Joint Staff were ordered to take polygraph lie detector tests as the administration sought to identify the source of leaks about military readiness and weapons stocks.

“We know there are hugely depleted weapons stockpiles, which have prompted some US officials to urge a pause in the war on Iran,” Mabon said.

“When you put that together, it is probably the main reason Trump said no to MBS.”

Does China stand to lose more?

Washington’s response may also reflect the different strategic importance it places on the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb. Hormuz carries oil and gas from Gulf producers to a global market on which the US economy depends. Bab al-Mandeb has become particularly important for trade to Asia and China.

Some analysts have therefore argued that prolonged disruption could hurt Beijing more severely than the US. China remains somewhat dependent on imported energy via the Red Sea. Higher oil prices can also benefit US energy companies, some of which have donated millions of dollars to Trump and the Republican Party.

But Bab al-Mandeb disruption would not fall neatly along geopolitical lines, experts say. Attacks on Saudi infrastructure and shipping would directly harm one of Washington’s closest regional partners, while higher transport and energy costs would eventually feed into prices paid by US consumers.

Mabon rejected the suggestion that Trump was pursuing a calculated strategy of tolerating disruption to weaken China or reward his donors.

“The potential closure of Bab al-Mandeb and strikes on the Saudi pipeline will hit major US allies harder than China,” he said. Whatever benefits higher prices might bring US oil producers would be outweighed politically by the damage inflicted on consumers and the wider economy, he added.

With the US already stretched by war with Iran – which the Trump administration initially expected to end within days – Washington may now be confronting the reality that entering another war in the Middle East carries considerable military, economic and electoral risks.

“I don’t see any kind of grand strategy at play here,” Mabon said. “There is no off-ramp regarding Iran and I think that, in the case of Yemen, there is no easy off-ramp either.”