US and UK strike Yemen; Houthis claim rapid missile retaliation

US and UK strikes in Yemen: Houthis claim seven-minute missile response

The Anglo-American offensive against Yemen has not subdued the Houthis. On the contrary, it has allowed the Shia group to position itself as the only actor willing to stand up to the West in the Red Sea. The airstrikes, carried out by the US and UK, aimed to degrade Houthi military capabilities after weeks of attacks on merchant vessels. According to the version disseminated by the Yemeni Armed Forces, the response came in seven minutes: missiles targeting US and British naval assets in the Red Sea. The message is as clear as it is worrying: deterrence has failed.

What peine in the Red Sea?

According to Washington's official account, the trigger was the first-ever use of anti-ship ballistic missiles by the Houthis against international merchant ships. President Joe Biden justified the strikes as a direct response to these launches, which he said endangered US military personnel, civilian sailors, and commercial partners. The White House mentioned crews from more than twenty countries being threatened or taken hostage in acts of piracy. The exact number of those affected is not detailed in the statement, but the message is clear: freedom of navigation is at stake.

What Biden did not mention, according to some participants, is that the Houthis have been bombed by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates using US weapons since 2015. That decade of war, they argue, has taught them to adapt tactics, use mobile weaponry, and build tunnels to store missiles. Western double standards are the most repeated argument.

The hypocrisy pointed out by critics

While the US and its allies supply missiles to Ukraine to defend against Russia, they consider it unacceptable for Iran to provide arms to Yemen. This contradiction, which one participant calls "childish logic," fuels the thesis that the international order is an exclusive club where some can arm themselves and others cannot. The lingering question is whether Iran is behind the Houthi missiles and, if the US formally accuses them, whether this would trigger a greater escalation. The only certainty is that arms supplies have become the diplomatic battlefield of the conflict.

Economic impact: shipping routes and prices

Beyond the military front, the Red Sea crisis has an immediate economic derivative. Shipping companies have started diverting containers via South Africa, increasing freight costs and lengthening delivery times between Europe and Asia. Companies like Maersk, cited in the analysis, have opted for the long route rather than risking impact. The cost is passed on to final prices, in a context of inflation already strained by energy. The irony is that Europe, which does not directly participate in the bombings, suffers the most from the trade diversion. Some analyses suggest that expensive oil benefits the US by making extraction profitable, so conflicts in the region are not entirely unrelated to their interests.

Towards a world war?

The hypothesis of a Third World War runs through every analysis. The most repeated thesis is that the US is losing hegemony and that its decline drags down the rest. Some argue that Russia and China benefit from Western exhaustion: Moscow because it diverts attention from Ukraine, Beijing because it gains a trading partner and reduces US influence. The problem, they warn, is that a declining power is more unpredictable, and a miscalculation in the Red Sea could turn a local conflict into a global fire. The question is not whether there will be escalation, but when and at what cost.

No one knows if the Houthis will exhaust the defenses of Western warships, as suggested by part of the analysis. What seems clear is that the Anglo-American operation has turned Yemen into a symbol. If the goal was deterrence, the effect has been the opposite: the Shia group has gained visibility and support. Next week could bring a new round of attacks or secret negotiations. Either scenario leaves the West with the ball in their court.