On November 21, the
Iranian-backed Houthi militia launched a drone attack against the Dhabba Oil
Terminal in Yemen’s Hadramawt Governorate. This was the second attack they had
launched against this particular facility and the third such strike on Yemeni
oil ports in the past two months. The escalation comes after the expiration of
Yemen’s truce in early October, which the Houthis refused to renew. The threat
of further attacks on oil ports and military targets remains high as the
militant group tests the tolerance and response of Yemen’s government and the
international community while increasing its demands.
اضافة اعلان
The Houthis’
rejection of the truce with the Yemeni government was based on three
fundamental factors. The first is the rebels’ inability to fulfill their
obligations under the agreement to lift the siege on Taiz because their control
over the city keeps pressure on their opponents and gives them increased
leverage in any peace negotiations. The second is a lack of interest in the
peace process itself as the current status quo gives the Houthis access to
Yemeni resources without committing to a power-sharing agreement that could
threaten their monopoly over the war-torn country’s northern territory. The
third is a desire to return to violence as swiftly as possible because this
tactic proved to give them the upper hand in negotiations in the past. Within
48 hours of the truce’s expiration, the Houthis’ military spokesperson warned
Saudi and Emirati oil workers to leave the country while the militant group
prepared its attack.
To make good on
their threats, the Houthis imposed an embargo on oil exports by attacking
Yemeni ports. This was part of a broader operation to pressure the national
government to share extractive resources in areas Houthi forces do not control.
The attack also reminded the Gulf countries, which had shown willingness to
engage in the peace process, that the Houthis can stage drone attacks on
vulnerable targets without any risk of retaliation. While the drone strike on
Dhabba did not cause significant physical damage to the oil terminal’s
infrastructure, it did force a tanker to leave the port without taking on its
shipment of oil exports from government-controlled territory.
The Houthis demand
that the Yemeni government pay the salaries of civil servants in
Houthi-controlled areas, including their militia members who are fighting the
coalition. This unreasonable request echoes the Houthi movement’s behavior in
other matters and reflects its view that it is entitled to state resources.
However, given that most of the oil exported from Yemen’s southern terminals is
pumped out of fields in the southern part of the country, the Houthis’ attacks
could reignite historical grievances over the distribution of resources. This
could stoke further conflict between the North and the South — particularly
given the preexisting general perception by southerners that their resources
are already being looted by northern elites.
At the same
time, the Houthis hold themselves above accountability for the financial and
natural resources in the areas they do control. They collect millions of
dollars off the revenues generated by Hodeida port, on the Red Sea. They also
held the decaying SAFER oil tanker in the Red Sea hostage, not allowing UN
officials to inspect it, as a form of leverage to strengthen their negotiating
position. Recently, the UN reached an agreement with the Houthis to transfer
the oil to another tanker to avoid an imminent crisis; but it is still unclear
how the issue of sharing the resources from this tanker is going to be
resolved.
The Houthis
control significant commercial resources under monopoly conditions, which
allows them to collect national revenues from land, electricity, water, and
internet utilities, businesses, and telecommunications companies located in
territory under their control. These revenue streams are diverted to fund the
Houthis’ war effort, depriving the rest of the population of critical services,
including health and education. As a result, areas under Houthi control must
rely on humanitarian aid to fulfill normal state functions. The Houthis’ focus
on oil and natural gas resources is motivated by a desire to finance their
power and capabilities in an increasingly monitored space, especially while
their traditional foreign financier, Iran, grapples with domestic unrest.
Houthis denounce
Western concerns
The US and European countries condemned the Houthis’ latest terrorist
drone attack, urging the militant group to respect its obligations under
international law. The Houthi-controlled news channel Al-Maseera TV ridiculed
the international community’s position by responding: “The noise made by the
Western countries and their ambassadors after the operation will not change
anything.”
… policymakers must pay attention to the interconnections between Yemen’s conflict and its many preexisting as well as emergent issues, which include a secessionist drive fueled by public service neglect in the South along with discrepancies in humanitarian assistance by the international community that pays more attention to Houthi-controlled areas than the rest of Yemen.
A senior Houthi
member of the national negotiating delegation, Abdul-Malik Al-Ajri, asserted:
“Western statements about the operations of [the Houthi militia] lack any
political value,” adding that, “the time in which the West defines their red
lines in the region and the world has long gone.”
Unfortunately,
the Houthi leadership interprets any other actor’s efforts toward peace as
indicative of an aversion to military confrontation. And this view is
reinforced by the fact that the Houthis are, time and again, able to launch
unprovoked attacks without suffering any reprisals, military or otherwise, due
to an overwhelming international commitment toward peace that focuses on
restraining Saudi actions in Yemen. Moreover, as the Houthis observe the
world’s largely tepid response toward Iran for supplying combat drones to
Russia in its conflict with Ukraine, the Yemeni rebel group increasingly assumes
that no international policies or mechanisms can stop or limit their own use of
offensive drone technology.
As such, the
Houthis’ adversaries are at a disadvantage — unable to confront, limit, or
influence the militants’ behavior in the Yemeni war. Drones and ballistic
missiles present a risk-free opportunity for escalation, and the Houthis see
this as one of their greatest achievements in deterrence. Illustratively, the
Houthis republished an article by a Jewish cultural magazine on their TV station
website that examined the limitations of conventional warfare in response to
the group’s Iranian-supplied drones. The article’s suggestive title,
“Overmatch”, was creatively interpreted by the Houthis as a wider testament to
their own power that allegedly cannot be deterred. It has become increasingly
frustrating for many Yemenis that the Houthi militia is free to impose its
political and military will on much of the country, while the international
community has no effective response.
UN special envoy
to Yemen, Hans Grundberg, referred to the impact of the Houthi attacks on
Yemen’s economy in his briefing to the UN Security Council on November 24.
However, even though the UN recognizes the Houthis’ intransigence, much more
could be done to pressure them into abandoning their maximalist demands. The
first is to ensure that Yemen’s national resources are used for economic
development and humanitarian needs instead of diverting them toward war. Oil
and gas resources are not a commodity that should be divided between political
elites. The benefits derived from these and other valuable national resources
should be distributed fairly and equitably among Yemen’s people, with the
government accountable for their use and the citizenry part of the conversation
on their disbursement.
Militias must
not be allowed to play a role in this process. Second, the UN needs to ensure
that the Houthis’ ability to launch stand-off strikes — whether by missile or
drone — is not left unchecked. A decisive response by the UN Security Council
is needed as the Houthis’ past use of such destabilizing tactics to advance
their negotiation aims has repeatedly derailed the peace process.
What can be done?
Given the international community’s aversion to military intervention
in the Yemeni conflict and the overall push to achieve peace, the Houthis
calculate that a resumption in attacks can serve as the primary means to
implement their demands. For the international community, understanding that
this tactic is not likely to stop requires formulating a more robust deterrence
strategy.
At the same
time, policymakers must pay attention to the interconnections between Yemen’s
conflict and its many preexisting as well as emergent issues, which include a
secessionist drive fueled by public service neglect in the South along with
discrepancies in humanitarian assistance by the international community that
pays more attention to Houthi-controlled areas than the rest of Yemen.
The Houthis’
daring claims to lands they never governed in the past nor have any legal or
historical rights to could easily stoke a renewed national conflict between
Yemen’s North and South. A scenario in which Yemen’s government acquiesces to
pressure to pay the Houthis will enable the militia to further forsake its
responsibilities on the humanitarian front and reinforce the perception that
the South is neglected, thus igniting a new and even more intense civil war in
a country already exhausted by nearly a decade of conflict and violence.
Fatima Abo Alasrar is a non-resident scholar at the Middle East
Institute and a senior analyst with the Washington Center for Yemeni Studies.
This article first appeared in the December 9 edition of the Middle
East Institute (MEI).
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
