Prosperity Guardian Fails to Stop Red Sea Houthi Attacks

Red Sea: Operation Prosperity Guardian Stalls

On the same day the new naval coalition was named, the USS Carney shot down 14 drones, while HMS Diamond added one more. Both were part of the same wave. Operation Prosperity Guardian launched with this paradox built in: an international shield for Red Sea shipping announced while attacks continued unabated. A US military official previewed the plan in a message promising navigation protection. What trinc was a tanker carrying nearly one million barrels of US crude making a U-turn in the middle of the Red Sea.

What is Operation Prosperity Guardian?

It was presented as an international effort to protect commercial shipments crossing the Red Sea. The formula on paper is the usual one: a multinational naval force escorting merchant vessels and deterring attackers from the Yemeni coast. No blockade. No invasion. Just acompañante.

The design combines drone and missile interception with deterrent presence. The problem is that the incident log didn't stop for a single day. Each new attack erodes the mission's central argument. If the corridor remains dangerous, what is the point of the acompañante?

Attacks the Acompañante Has Failed to Deter

The tanker transporting US crude executed a 180-degree turn, an unusual maneuver for a vessel of that size and cargo. Then came the bulk carrier Tutor, showing stern damage according to circulated images. The impact is attributed to an unmanned craft, and there is a detail left unexplained: the armed crew did not return fire.

Added to this is the launch of a ballistic missile that reportedly landed in a desert area, with no significant consequences according to accounts circulating online. And the aerial bombardments by the United States and the United Kingdom on Hodeidah, Taizz, Zabid, and Sana'a, marking another escalation: drones are no longer just intercepted; targets on land are being struck.

What is Attributed to the Houthis and What Remains Unconfirmed

The Houthis are blamed for ship attacks, and some user analysis adds much more: that they have waged war against a coalition of countries for eight years and have downed several US drones, some of the most expensive in inventory. There is also talk of the closure of the Israeli port of Eilat and Iranian advisors on the ground. None of this comes with independent verification, so it should be treated as such: unconfirmed claims.

What is factual is the mocking tone accompanying the deployment in much of the conversation, with the tag Prosperity Guardian 404 circulating as a summary of the outcome. The gap between announcement and results is today the main argument for those doubting the operation. There are also those who refuse to take sides, viewing the clash as a foreign sacrifice expecting only damage on both sides.

Who Joined and With What Means?

Here the numbers deflate quickly. Singapore was said to contribute military personnel, with an uncomfortable precision: as observers. Sri Lanka’s adherence arrives while the country is bankrupt, with expectations of receiving something in return. These are political supports rather than operational capabilities, and should be read as such before counting them as real force on the water.

Commercial Cost and Terrorist Label

In parallel, the debate shifts to markets. Some argue that trade through the zone continues and oil prices are falling, reducing the urgency of the problem.

A final element adds noise. According to shared information, the US might remove the terrorist organization label from the Houthis if they cease attacks on ships in the Red Sea. The very actor being bombed could exit the blacklist as bargaining chip. Military pressure and negotiation coexisting without either fully imposing itself.

How long can a coalition last that cannot even get a single freighter to avoid turning around?