What UK strikes on Iran-backed Houthi rebels could mean for Middle East conflict

After six weeks of sporadically effective assaults, the uneasy stand-off between Houthi rebels threatening to choke off a chunk of global trade and Western naval forces seeking to stop them has seemingly reached an alarming inflection point.

The Iran-backed Yemeni group has been attacking commercial shipping heading through the Suez Canal to signal support for Hamas in the Gaza war – and to test the resolve of Washington, London and Western allies in keeping open a key artery of international commerce.

If reports that the US, Britain and a third country, possibly France, are preparing direct strikes on Houthi targets are realised, it will be a key moment in the game of geo-political chess being played out in the Middle East over whether the Israel-Hamas conflict becomes a wider, and considerably more dangerous, regional conflagration.

The reasons for a Washington-led strike against the Houthis, whose Tehran-based supporters have ensured they have a formidable arsenal of missiles and drones, are clear.

The Suez Canal handles 12 per cent of global trade and nearly a third of container shipping. With major shipping companies diverting their vessels around Africa, the de facto closure of the Red Sea threatens an enduring and painful supply chain crisis with unpalatable consequences for inflation and Western economies.

The West needs to show that it cannot be held to ransom by Iran’s “axis of resistance” built from proxy forces across the Middle East and if, as has happened, the Houthi attacks on shipping continue to escalate, then the growing desire to give the rebel faction a tactical bloody nose is rapidly becoming irresistible.

Related Article

As Washington pointed out on Sunday, an attempt this weekend by four Houthi fast boats – eventually neutralised by the US navy – to seize a container vessel in the Red Sea represented the 23^rd attack since 19 November.

Administering that bloody nose is well within the military capabilities of London, Washington and Paris – all of whom already have substantial naval assets in the area as well as aerial threats, such as the RAF base at Akrotiri, Cyprus, from which RAF Typhoons could easily participate in a co-ordinated assault in a “shock and awe” style attack on Houthi strongholds.

But against this must be balanced a panoply of constraints and potentially weighty consequences.

Firstly, any significant attack on the Houthis risks at one fell swoop widening the Israel-Hamas conflict by drawing the main Western powers into a direct confrontation with a group which has made no secret of its ambitions to become a regional player and support the agenda of its backers in Tehran.

Secondly, it would be naïve to think that a single strike against Houthi strongholds and stockpiles would neutralise their threat.

Analysts point out that the Houthis have a burgeoning arsenal, which includes potent anti-ship missiles that have yet to be tried in anger. And any formal opening of hostilities with the group would make it likely that they would seek to strike back against not only against Western naval vessels and commercial shipping but also nearby land targets such as Washington’s sprawling Camp Lemonnier base in Djibouti – America’s only permanent base in Africa.

The stage would be set for a drawn-out test of strength and will between the West and an enemy which has already shown itself capable of sapping the military might of Saudi Arabia since Riyadh sought to intervene in Yemen in 2015.

There are unknown quantities. Not far from Camp Lemonnier sits China’s only substantial overseas military base in the shape of a substantial naval facility.

But whether Beijing could be persuaded to join any form of coalition in the name of defending global trade remains, at best, unclear. The risk of tensions spiralling across the Red Sea and beyond is now all too real.