Yemen looks to add hypersonic missiles into domestic arsenal: Report
The Cradle | March 14, 2024
The Ansarallah-allied Yemeni armed forces recently tested a hypersonic missile and are preparing to introduce the technology into the country’s military arsenal, a Yemeni military source revealed to Russia’s state-run RIA Novosti news agency on 14 March.
“[Ansarallah’s] missile forces have successfully tested a missile that is capable of reaching speeds of up to Mach 8 and runs on solid fuel; Yemen intends to begin manufacturing it for use during attacks in the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, and the Gulf of Aden, as well as against targets in Israel,” the source is quoted as saying.
The unnamed official also revealed Sanaa has, over the past three months, “upgraded its missiles and drones, modifying explosive warheads to double their destructive power.”
Last week, Ansarallah leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi said during a televised speech that Yemen has been making efforts to “produce hypersonic missiles,” saying: “Our enemies, friends, and our people will see a level of achievement of strategic importance that will put our country in the ranks of few countries with these capabilities in the world.”
“The Yemeni forces used new weapons in recent operations in the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea, which surprised the United States and Britain,” the Ansarallah leader revealed during his speech.
Hypersonic weapons fly at speeds in excess of Mach 5, can strike targets thousands of miles away within minutes, and pose crucial challenges to missile defense systems. While a traditional ballistic missile travels into the atmosphere and then returns to Earth on top of the target, a hypersonic missile travels much closer to the Earth, allowing it to switch targets on the fly.
Only four countries have successfully developed and tested hypersonic missiles: Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea. The US is also developing hypersonic missiles; however, its program has trailed behind the others due to a lack of planning, technological gaps, and Washington’s belief that ballistic missiles are a better and more cost-effective bet against an adversary.
The US navy – with minimal support from the UK – has been waging its biggest battle since WWII against the Arab world’s poorest country since early January in support of Israel’s genocide campaign in Gaza. Despite launching hundreds of attacks inside Yemen, Washington has not managed to deter the country’s pro-Palestine actions.
Ansarallah leaders have vowed to continue attacking US, UK, and Israeli ships in the waters surrounding the Gulf Arab nation until Israel’s assault on Gaza ends.
Iran: A New US-Israeli Provocation
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 07.03.2024
In an exclusive interview with Tehran Times, the deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), Pejman Shirmardi, rejected claims that his country’s nuclear program is not fully transparent. “From day one, we have made it clear that our nuclear activities are exclusively peaceful. Every time the IAEA has asked us for clarification, we have given them answers. Nothing has changed. Tell us what part of our nuclear program isn’t transparent, and we will prove that it is. As the leader of the Islamic Revolution once said, ‘The West knows very well that it is lying about our nuclear activities,’” the Iranian said.
Condoning Israel’s Nuclear Policy
Pejman Shirmardi made the remark after IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, during a summit earlier this month, accused Iran of not being fully transparent about Iran’s relationship with his agency. Even the Western press, however, has picked up on the background to this opinion, writing that the IAEA director general’s reaction is most likely that he chose to ignore Israel’s alarming nuclear threats against the Palestinians in recent months and to shift the focus, as usual, to Iran. Israeli National Heritage Minister Amihai Eliyahu has twice since the beginning of the Gaza war proposed destroying the Strip and the Palestinian civilians living there with nuclear weapons. According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, the Israeli minister’s statements clearly confirm that Israel has nuclear weapons.
“Against the background of Israel’s historical policy of uncertainty about possessing nuclear weapons, these statements not only explicitly confirm the country’s possession of such weapons, but also demonstrate a willingness to seriously consider their use in completely inadequate scenarios,” the diplomat said.
“This is a very serious reason to think about where the extremist representatives of Israel may be led by the realization of their permissiveness in the conditions of virtually unlimited patronage from the West,” she stressed. In this regard, many noted that IAEA inspectors have never attempted to inspect Israel’s nuclear facilities, despite repeated calls from countries in the region that do not feel safe because of the warmongering policies of the Israeli regime and the West behind it.
It should be noted that experts estimate that the Israeli regime has between 200 and 400 nuclear warheads in its arsenal because of its deliberate ambiguity regarding its nuclear policy. It has repeatedly refused inspections of its military nuclear facilities, not to mention its refusal to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Yet Iran, as a decent and responsible member of the global community, is a party to the NPT and has consistently maintained that its nuclear program is exclusively civilian in nature and subject to the strictest UN oversight in the world. The policy of double standards is crystal clear. When it comes to stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons, Israel is absolved of responsibility. As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has a peaceful program for energy and medical purposes, yet it is subject to the most stringent inspection program in IAEA history. And it is against the Islamic Republic, not its counterpart, that the West has imposed the most painful sanctions regime. Israel, with hundreds of nuclear warheads, is not subject to any punitive measures. On the contrary, the regime is endlessly rewarded with more military weapons (paid for by US taxpayers), more money, and more diplomatic and political support.
Grossi’s Hypocritical Policy
The policy of hypocrisy and double standards is clearly seen in the behavior of the Western proxy, IAEA Director General Grossi, which was clearly manifested in his repeated statements on inspections of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. Anytime inspections were conducted in Iran and official reports confirmed Iran’s compliance with its obligations, Grossi spoke in Tehran and said that everything was going on normally, giving no cause for concern. However, upon his return from Iran and after accusations were made against Iran by the West and especially the US, he consistently changed his viewpoint without proper explanation. He began proclaiming Iran to be a violator, accusing it of not following rules that no one seemed to know. A number of media publications, especially Israeli media, mentioned Grossi’s changing narrative after his return from Iran, noting that he suddenly started criticizing the Iranian side, contrary to previous statements, accusing them of violating international rules.
Thus, based on relevant publications in media all over the world, it is clear that Grossi has repeatedly changed his point of view after the inspections in Iran. He, being a supporter of dialog and cooperation, suddenly started accusing Iran of violating the rules without explaining his position in sufficient detail. This raises serious questions about his integrity and objectivity.
This ambivalent behavior has its own underlying causes, which can be interpreted in various ways. Perhaps political or economic factors influenced Grossi to change his position on Iran. He may have been subjected to pressure or manipulation, causing him to change his point of view. In general, Grossi’s dislike of Iranian inspections is based more on political bias than on facts. However, the change in his position after his visit to Tehran raises questions about his true motives and possible reasons for his ambivalent attitude.
The complicated state of relations between the IAEA and Grossi personally with Iran is a relevant and complex issue in today’s geopolitical arena. Although Grossi, as a professional, is supposed to be objective in his assessments, his harsh bias against Iran can be explained by several factors. First, Grossi, as a security and political expert, is aware of the many factors negatively affecting the stability and security of the region. Iran, in his opinion, is playing an active role in the Syrian conflict by supporting the Assad government and engaging in hostilities. In addition, Iran is suspected by the West of developing nuclear weapons, although there is no evidence to that effect. In light of these circumstances, Grossi probably sees Iran as a potential threat to stability in the region. Second, Grossi may likely be influenced by a number of domestic factors that affect his personal beliefs and interests. For example, he may have strong ties to states and regions that have strained relations with Iran. This connection is extremely personal and may be for historical, religious, or commercial reasons. Such ties may make him more likely to deny or exaggerate Iran’s vulnerability. Finally, Grossi, as the person responsible for communicating information and analysis, may face public and political pressures that may affect his objectivity.
However, despite these factors, as a professional, Grossi must constantly strive for objectivity and carefully weigh all facts and arguments. As a result, Grossi’s subsequent analyses and assessments should be based on facts, taking into account a variety of viewpoints and striving for objectivity as an international UN official serving the interests of the world, not just the whims of the United States.
Provocations of the United States and Israel
With the Israeli regime bogged down in Gaza, the Israeli and US intelligence communities are busy planning a new nuclear crisis with Iran that will overshadow the catastrophic humanitarian crisis currently unfolding in the Palestinian enclave. It has been a relatively long time since Iran’s nuclear program last made global headlines. The last instance of constructive diplomacy between Tehran and Washington occurred when the two sides successfully negotiated a deal to exchange prisoners and release Iranian assets frozen in South Korean bank accounts. The deal was a kind of temporary détente, partly aimed at preserving the status quo and preventing escalation. The unexpected operation by Palestinian resistance groups in the Gaza Strip on October 7 and the Israeli atrocities that followed seemed to further set back the already stagnant nuclear diplomacy.
Now things are changing again, but not in the direction of problem-solving, but towards creating a new nuclear crisis, the consequences of which are expected to make the whole drama in Gaza trivial. While there is nothing new in Iran’s nuclear activities, there is a growing trend on Israel’s part to increase diplomatic pressure on Iran ahead of the next meeting of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency scheduled for March 6. Articles are appearing in the Western media suggesting that Israel, together with the US, is pushing the world toward a new nuclear crisis, this time accusing Iran of enriching uranium to 90 percent, the weapons-grade purity level. By making such dangerous accusations against Tehran, they seek to create a hostile atmosphere with the ultimate goal of censuring Iran at the IAEA Board of Governors meeting.
According to information obtained by the Tehran Times, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has personally approached the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) about the matter, saying he will advance the planned crisis through hype and convince the CIA at some point in the future. Mired in the quagmire of Gaza, Netanyahu feels increasingly isolated domestically and internationally given his disastrous war in the Strip. As the turmoil over Rafah continues to plague Tel Aviv, Netanyahu has floated the idea of igniting a nuclear crisis with Iran, a scheme designed to divert world attention away from Gaza and undermine the Biden administration by portraying it as weak and unable to deal with Iran’s nuclear program.
Whether the Israeli regime will succeed in provoking a global crisis with Iran through machinations remains to be seen. Iran has so far refrained from any strong negative initiatives and, most recently, even expressed hope that the now defunct Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) would come back to life. In addition, Iran has begun preparations for the upcoming visit of IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi to Tehran, during which a number of issues of mutual interest are expected to be addressed. The planned escalation of tensions at the next IAEA Board of Governors meeting, however, could derail ongoing efforts to strengthen nuclear de-escalation.
Iranian Court Seizes US-Owned Tanker to Compensate Sanctions Victims
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 06.03.2024
The decision comes in the wake of a series of frivolous rulings by US courts over the past decade ordering the confiscation of frozen Iranian assets to pay American plaintiffs, including an outrageous 2018 decision requiring the Islamic Republic to pay $6 billion in compensation to families of 9/11 victims.
An Iranian court ordered the confiscation of a American-owned oil tanker on Wednesday on the basis of a complaint by Iranians suffering from a rare skin disease affected by crushing US sanctions.
The ship – the Advantage Sweet, a Marshall Islands-flagged crude tanker chartered by Chevron and carrying crude oil from Kuwait to Texas, was detained by Iranian Navy commandos in April of 2023, “in compliance with a confiscation order issued by Iranian judicial authorities,” after it collided with an Iranian fishing vessel in the Gulf of Oman and attempted to flee the scene.
Wednesday’s ruling was made after a group of Iranians suffering from Epidermolysis Bullosa – a painful skin condition resulting in easy blistering of the skin which can evoke skin cancer, appealed to a Tehran court to challenge US sanctions which blocked the export of life-saving medications and special medical bandages exported from Sweden.
Gothenburg-based medical device company Molnlycke Health Care was forced to stop selling its products to Iran in 2018, citing US sanctions unilaterally imposed by the Trump administration after Washington walked out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal. The Biden administration revived talks on US reentry into the agreement, but talks stalled after Joe Biden said he would be ready to “kill” the JCPOA to keep Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on Washington’s “terror” listing.
The Fars News Agency confirmed Wednesday that the Advantage Sweet had been seized, and that Iran would be unloading about $50 million worth of crude oil from the vessel following the ruling.
Wednesday’s ruling comes following a series of US seizures of commercial ships carrying Iranian crude oil, including the move by US authorities last year to seize and unload a cargo of Iranian oil in Texas from the Suez Rajan, another Marshall Islands-flagged tanker, on grounds that it violated US sanctions by trying to ship Iranian oil to China. The tanker, renamed the St. Nikolas, was consequently seized by Iran in January in a tit-for-tat move while carrying 145,000 of crude oil from Iraq to Turkiye.
The ruling also follows a series of controversial lawsuits in US courts over the past decade ordering the Islamic Republic to pay for acts of terrorism it had nothing to do with, including the 1983 bombing of a US Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, and the 9/11 terror attacks.
In December, a Tehran court ordered the United States to pay nearly $50 billion in compensation for the 2020 assassination of IRGC Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, with the award issued to over 3,300 plaintiffs for “material, moral and punitive damages” ruled to have been caused by Soleimani’s murder. The court held Donald Trump, former Secretary of Defense Mike Pompeo, US intelligence agencies including the NSA and the CIA, and 38 other individuals, organizations and entities responsible for the commander’s killing.
The US has shown no indication of plans to honor the Iranian court-ordered payout.
The conflict in the Red Sea and the reaction of the world community
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 04.03.2024
During the discussion that took place on 14 February 2024 at the UN Security Council meeting, questions were raised about the unlawful shelling by the US and UK in Yemen in violation of all international laws and regulations. This serious issue was discussed in detail due to the violations of international law and human rights that accompany these shellings. The UNSC participants condemned these actions by the US and the UK as illegal and unacceptable. Despite demagogic statements about the fight against terrorism and alleged support for international security, such shelling by Western powers located tens of thousands of kilometres away from the Red Sea basin only exacerbates the humanitarian situation in Yemen and causes irreparable harm to the lives of civilians, including primarily children and women. At the meeting, the panellists rightly raised the need to put an urgent end to this shelling and to return to negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. It was noted that another wave of violence by Western countries would only exacerbate the situation in that poor Arab country and hinder the achievement of sustainable peace in the region.
Russia’s and China’s opinion
Russia and China have deemed the US and UK bombing of Yemeni territory illegal and contrary to the United Nations Charter, accusing them of illegally attacking Yemen, whose residents support the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip in the face of the Israeli regime’s bloodbath. Russia’s Deputy Ambassador to the UN Dmitry Polyansky and China’s representative to the UN Zhang Jun stressed that the UN Security Council has never authorised military action against Yemen. For his part, the UN special envoy for Yemen, Western representative Hans Grundberg, said that the US and UK attacks and the American declaration of the Ansar Allah resistance movement in Yemen as a “specially designated terrorist group” were merely “of concern.” And what exactly could this so-called envoy, who is entirely on Washington’s payroll and receives all instructions from White House officials, have said.
Mr Polansky correctly emphasised that the root cause of the current situation is Israel’s war crimes in Gaza, which have provoked angry reactions in West Asia, including from Yemenis. “An immediate ceasefire in Gaza will help stabilise the situation in the Red Sea, and de-escalation will in turn unblock the efforts of Special Envoy Grundberg,” he said. The Chinese envoy also expressed concern over the escalation of tensions in the Red Sea region, in particular “the continuation of military operations by certain countries” against Yemen. He called for an immediate halt to the Yemeni hostilities against merchant shipping and stressed the fact that the UN Security Council has not authorised the use of force against Yemen.
“At this critical moment, China hopes that all parties in Yemen will put the interests of the people first, show determination and resolutely push the political process forward to achieve final results,” Zhang Jun added. He also emphasised that “the most urgent task is to immediately promote a ceasefire in Gaza and take responsible measures to prevent further escalation in the region.”
Aggressive actions of the US and UK
For weeks, the United States and Britain have been waging a fierce bombing campaign on Yemeni territory. The reason is well known – this Arab country has boldly declared its open support for the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip against the Israeli carnage since 7 October last year, in which some 30,000 civilians, especially the elderly, women and children, have already been killed. The US, being one of the leading superpowers and a global factor, has stated its brazen stance on the issue of shelling Yemen. They deny their direct involvement in the conflict, claiming that they are only supporting military assistance and supplies to Saudi Arabia, which in turn is conducting operations to defeat the Houthis. However, human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations have raised accusations of US involvement in human rights and civilian violations during these operations.
Despite strong condemnation of its brutal and aggressive actions, the United States has again “conducted five strikes in self-defence” against areas of Yemen controlled by the Houthi militia, the US Central Command said. It struck three mobile anti-ship cruise missiles, one unmanned underwater vessel and one unmanned surface vessel on 17 February, the statement said. “This is the first observed use of an unmanned aerial vehicle by the Houthis since the attacks began on 23 October,” CENTCOM said in a statement on its X website. Central Command said it had determined the missiles and ships posed “an immediate threat to U.S. Navy ships.” The Houthi attacks in the Red Sea area have been one of the signs of spreading conflict in the Middle East since war broke out between Israel and Hamas after 7 October.
Unlike the US, the UK, its closest ally and most likely a country once with a solid international reputation, chooses not to explicitly support Saudi Arabia, but also does not actively oppose it. Instead, London claims to be providing military assistance centred on training and advice to prepare the Saudi army for its tasks. In these statements, the British demagogically point to the importance of maintaining the stability of the region and fighting terrorism. However, in doing so, they forget to recall that it is they, together with their overseas partners, who are the main disturbers of peace and tranquillity and the main “creators” of the atmosphere of terrorism in the region.
Alongside these states, some delegates from US satellite countries expressed support for the US and UK, arguing that the shelling was in response to acts of terrorism and extremism that threaten world security. They emphasise the need for action to ensure the safety of their citizens and partners. The UN Security Council meeting was by all accounts very tense and controversial, reflecting the complexity of the situation in Yemen and the multifaceted challenges faced by the parties to the conflict. But it was nevertheless called for further discussion and for finding ways to end the violence and restore peace. In conclusion, the UN Security Council meeting emphasised that violators of international law and human rights, including the systematic shelling of Yemen, must be brought to justice and those responsible must be punished accordingly. The decision on further steps and investigations was postponed until all the arguments made during the discussion are recorded, and a relevant document is prepared for further voting.
Ways and means of resolving the conflict in the Red Sea
Human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations object to this position and allege US and UK complicity in human rights and civilian violations in Yemen. Critics also point out that US and UK military aid could be used to commit crimes against humanity and military operations could be disproportionate and indifferent to civilians. The need to resolve the conflict in Yemen is integral to upholding international law and protecting human rights. The world community must continue dialogue, find a political solution and provide humanitarian assistance to end the exclusively military approach and eliminate civilian suffering. So, the position of the US and UK on the shelling of Yemen is causing disagreement and concern among human rights supporters and humanitarian organisations. It is necessary to continue the international discussion in order to achieve peace and stability in the region, calling for respect for international law and the protection of human rights.
Yemen continues to actively target American and other ships that deliver supplies to Israel. The Yemenis’ main argument in favour of shelling ships delivering supplies to Israel is the destruction of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. In their view, the situation in Palestine remains tense due to Israeli occupation and state policies, leading to regular conflict and violence. In turn, by supporting trade with Israel, American and other ships become indirect contributors to Palestinian suffering. Yemen’s weakened economy and infrastructure put the country in a difficult position. Regular new sanctions and the blockade of the country by international allies make Yemen’s economy extremely vulnerable. For Yemen, the shelling of ships delivering supplies to Israel may be an attempt to gain international attention and launch a dialogue on the Palestinian issue.
In today’s world, the Red Sea remains a key region of geopolitical importance. Along with issues of security and economic stability, emerging conflicts between states and factors in the region regularly attract international attention. However, there are different ways and factors that can play an important role in resolving and preventing conflicts in order to achieve peace and tranquility in the Red Sea.
Above all, the States in which the Red Sea is located must take an active part in finding a way to resolve conflicts peacefully. They should seek dialogue and international cooperation rather than the use of force and military action. Instead of creating tension and threatening security, states should seek common interests and co-operation in the fields of economy, trade, transport and combating international terrorism.
However, in addition to the active role of states, international organisations and forums can play an important role in resolving conflicts in the Red Sea. For example, the United Nations can mediate negotiations and facilitate agreements between states in the region. It can propose mechanisms and strategies to resolve disputes and support dialogue between parties. Also, regional international organisations such as the Arab League or the African Union can contribute to conflict resolution and stability in the Red Sea.
In addition, the role of civil society and non-governmental organisations should not be forgotten. They can play an important role in planting peace and tranquility in the region through engaging in diplomatic efforts, supporting dialogue between the parties and publicly highlighting conflicts. Civil society can give a voice to peace and help to shape public opinion in favour of the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
It is quite clear that conflicts in the Red Sea can and must be resolved in the interests of peace and tranquillity in the region. To that end, the active participation of States, international organisations, civil society and non-governmental organisations is essential. Only through cooperation and dialogue can sustainable peace and tranquillity in the Red Sea be achieved, which will benefit all States and peoples living in the region.
Victor MIKHIN is a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.
Washington’s Wars Eroding its Global Clout
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 04.03.2024
If war is politics by other means, Washington’s ongoing wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe are meant to buttress its global influence on the one hand and undermine its competitors on the other. But the question is: how is this politics by other means working out for Washington? Not so good. Russia’s recent military victories in Ukraine and China’s expansive inroads into the Middle East alongside the growing anti-Americanism in the region (due to Washington’s support for Israel and its inability to prevent a genocide of the Palestinians) indicate an overall American inability to shape global geopolitics in unilateral ways to the exclusive advantage of Washington and its allies in Europe and elsewhere.
Russia’s recent military gains in Ukraine, for example, have very clearly established its military credentials as a power that has been able to withstand the combined military strength of the US and its European allies assembled in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). What does this mean for Washington’s policies in Central Asia? Most certainly, Washington cannot simply present Russia as a ‘weak’ military power that can be simply ‘isolated’. But more than that, Russia is utilising its victories over NATO in various ways.
For instance, when the NATO-backed Russia-Ukraine military conflict began, most reports in the mainstream US media began to spread false messaging about Central Asia potentially moving itself out of the so-called ‘Russian clout’. The US saw in it an opportunity to push itself into the region. But this has turned out to be a fiasco. When the US imposed sanctions on Russia, many Russian companies began to relocate their businesses to Central Asia, directly contributing to Central Asia’s impressive 4.8 percent growth rate in 2023. According to the findings of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the region is forecast to register an even more impressive level of growth at almost 5.7 percent in 2024-25.
In other words, thanks to Washington’s sanctions, the Russian political economy is now more deeply connected with Central Asia than it was before February 2022, which is also strengthening the Eurasian Economic Union. Now that this integration is working for the advantage of Central Asia means that the latter have little to no incentive to pay too much attention to Washington and/or the imperatives of moving decisively to Washington. It means that not only has the Biden administration’s policy of NATO expansion via Ukraine failed so far in Ukraine itself, but the ‘new’ Central Asia policy it inaugurated in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict has also failed to make any impact on the ground. Russia defeated US design also by approaching relations with the Central Asian States in ways that gave them enough space to stay neutral in the conflict. While the West saw this neutrality as a sign of Russian weakness in the region and the Central Asian States’ growing assertiveness, it failed to read how this was part of Russia’s strategy to cultivate its ties in a more balanced way. This balance is also pretty evident in the ways Russia has not objected to, or even resisted, China’s growing footprint in the region, although reports in the Western media often see China’s role in Central Asia at the expense of Russia. But the West seems to have been misreading this region.
As far as Washington’s war in the Middle East is concerned, its military support for Israel plus its inability to stop genocide has eroded its credibility. Suppose Washington has been supporting Israel to maintain its dominance in the Middle East. In that case, Washington’s excessive support is now derailing its objectives, since the Middle East is now exercising a lot more strategic autonomy vis-à-vis Washington than was the case until a few years ago.
In the past few months, a flurry of Chinese activity indicates it much more clearly than anything else. China has convened leadership summits, met with Arab delegates, supported their stance vis-à-vis Israel, and held joint military exercises with one of the US’ most important allies in the region (Saudi Arabia). The UAE, otherwise a close US ally and one of the first states to sign the Abraham Accords to recognise Israel and establish diplomatic ties with it, actually withdrew from the US-led naval task force in May 2023, indicating policy and interest-based differences.
The UAE is also a country in the Middle East that has over 100,000 Chinese living there and involved in many businesses. But when it comes to the Middle East itself, and the fact that many countries in the region are involved in China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), we see the region’s trade with China registering an overall growth of almost 45 percent in 2021 and 27 percent in 2022.
Given the economic integration, the Middle East is turning out to be a region where Washington’s clout is receding fast, without any signs of recovery in the immediate future at least. Although US strikes in the Red Sea on the Houthis are meant to indicate Washington’s willingness to offer a security umbrella to the Gulf states (against Iran-backed groups), the region appears to be past the point where it must have the US on its side to ensure security. Gulf states’ perceptions of Iran as an enemy are changing, thanks to Beijing’s mediation.
As far as Washington’s support for Israel is concerned and as far as the threat of a wider war in the region it is posing, Gulf states are on the edge of a conflict that might directly undermine their modernization programmes – development projects that mainly involve China in various capacities.
Therefore, if Washington’s involvement in the Israel war was meant to bring back the era of US dominance, the exact opposite is happening, both in the Middle East and Central Asia, which happen to be two of the world’s most energy-rich regions.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
UK Has Only Itself to Blame for Red Sea Attacks, Houthis Say as They Vow to Ramp Up Campaign

© Photo : Ansar Allah Media
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 03.03.2024
The Yemeni militia began a campaign of hijackings, missile and drone attacks against commercial ships operating in the crucial Red Sea global trade chokepoint in November, vowing to target any vessel thought to be affiliated with Israel, and subsequently shutting down a good chunk of global trade.
London has only itself to blame for attacks targeting its commercial vessels in the Red Sea, and the strikes will continue, officials from Yemen’s Ansar Allah (Houthi) militia said in a series of statements over the weekend.
“Yemen will continue to sink more British ships, and any repercussions or other damages will be added to Britain’s bill,” Houthi deputy foreign minister Hussein al-Ezzi said in an X post Sunday.
“[The UK] is a rogue state that attacks Yemen and partners with America in sponsoring ongoing crimes against civilians in Gaza,” al-Ezzi wrote, referencing the joint US-UK campaign of airstrikes inside Yemen which the Pentagon says are aimed at degrading the Houthis’ missile and drone capabilities.
The official’s comments came hours after United States Central Command confirmed that the UK-owned M/V Rubymar cargo ship carrying 21,000 tons of ammonium phosphate sulfate fertilizer had sunk in the Red Sea after being targeted by the Houthis on February 19.
Houthi Supreme Political Council member Mohammed Ali al-Houthi took to X Saturday night to address the UK prime minister directly.
“We say to [Prime Minister Rishi] Sunak: you and your government bear responsibility for the M/V Rubymar, and responsibility for supporting the genocide and siege in Gaza,” al-Houthi wrote in an Arabic-language X post.
“You have a chance to salvage the M/V Rubymar by sending a letter of guarantee signed by George Galloway that the relief trucks agreed upon would enter Gaza,” al-Houthi added, referencing the Workers Party of Britain MP elected in a landslide in the Rochdale by-election on February 29.
Galloway has been an outspoken critic of British support for Israel amid the Gaza crisis, and an outspoken critic of American and British policy in the Middle East going back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The Houthis kicked off a months-long maritime campaign of ship hijackings, drone strikes and missile launches in November in solidarity with Gaza amid Israel’s ground assault into the besieged Palestinian enclave. The US announced the formation of a naval ‘coalition of the willing’ against the Houthis in December, and began bombing Yemen in January together with Britain. The Houthis responded by barring all commercial and warships belonging to British and American “losers” from operating in the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and the Bab al-Mandab Strait, repeatedly firing at Western warships deployed in waters adjacent to Yemen.
Shipping through the Red Sea has declined precipitously by as a much as 40 percent from its normal levels, with the Houthis adding tens of billions of dollars in global shipping costs, disrupting supply chains linking Europe and Asia, and resulting in a rise in energy prices.
US, pushed by Israel, involved in widening war despite consequences: Iran FM
Press TV – February 28, 2024
Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian says the United States is involved in the expansion of the scope of the Israeli war on Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip to other fronts across the West Asia region.
Amir-Abdollahian stressed that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is seeking to widen the Gaza war and involve the United States in a way that goes beyond the all-out support Washington and some of its allies have already provided for Tel Aviv.
“The Americans do not yet have the necessary will to stop the war, but at the same time, they are sending messages expressing their unwillingness to expand its scope because they are well aware of the danger of expanding its scope,” the top Iranian diplomat said.
“On the other hand, they are expanding the scope of the war through their joint aggression with the UK against Yemen.Today in Europe, everyone talks about the necessity of stopping the war, but Britain is playing a double game.”
He made the statement in an interview with Lebanon’s Arabic-language al-Mayadeen television news network in the Swiss city of Geneva on Tuesday,
Amir-Abdollahian added that Washington’s talk of reducing the intensity of the Gaza war, rather than stopping it, is a “mistake and malicious behavior that means giving the green light to Netanyahu” to press ahead with its months-long brutal aggression.
“I told the British foreign minister that the joint British-American aggression against Yemen is a strategic mistake that you are committing,” he said. Yemen has “proven that they do not trifle with any party regarding the security of their lands. They have been able to convey this message and clearly warned that ships carrying military cargo to Israel will be stopped.”
US hypocrisy on Gaza
The Iranian foreign minister also pointed to the US administration’s unswerving support to Israel in its brutal war on the besieged Palestinian territory and its continued supply of weapons and logistics to the occupying regime.
“Our information has it that the process of sending weapons from all American bases in the region and its warships to Tel Aviv is continuing,” he said, adding, “Islamic countries should not be turned into a place to supply weapons to the Israeli entity.”
Denouncing the US hypocrisy in dealing with the Gaza war, Amir-Abdollahian said, “Everyone agrees that if the United States abandons its military support for the occupying entity, Netanyahu will not be able to continue the war against Gaza for even an hour.”
The top Iranian diplomat also stressed that Israel did not achieve any of its declared goals in the war on Gaza, including the elimination of the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, the group’s disarmament and the arrest of its Gaza-based leader Yahya Sinwar.
“The Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements are at their best despite all the challenges and difficulties, and that they have the material and human resources and capabilities necessary to continue to withstand a longer war than what we have seen so far,” Amir-Abdollahian said.
Praising the morale and steadfastness of the residents of Gaza and the occupied West Bank, he underlined that the Israeli plans in Rafah “will not translate into reality and the occupation will not be able to forcibly displace people to the Egyptian Sinai.”
UN performance ‘unacceptable’
Elsewhere in his interview, the Iranian foreign minister censured as “unacceptable” the United Nations’ performance regarding the situation on the ground in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, saying the UN Security Council has not fulfilled its duty in light of the United States’ use of its veto.
“The Security Council did not fulfill its duty as the US continuously and unilaterally exploited its veto power. Every prospect and proposal of a Gaza ceasefire has been rejected by the American veto, exhibiting a contradictory behavior to the banners of primary human rights. Even at the UN Human Rights Council, we still have not seen any adequate mobilization in this regard,” he said.
“Does the UNHRC not want to create a special committee that relays the facts and investigations into war crimes, genocide, and human rights violations being committed in Gaza? So far, we have not witnessed a singular decisive measure taken by any of the organizations that fall under the UN.”
Amir-Abdollahian said UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres had so far taken some good measures but had not been able to help the people of Gaza “in an effective and real way” through the existing mechanisms of the United Nations.
“In the Human Rights Council, we clearly see that everything is subject to the control of politicians and false human rights advocates,” he said.
Israel launched the campaign of death and destruction on October 7, after Hamas-led Palestinian resistance groups conducted the surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the occupying entity in response to the regime’s decades-long atrocities.
Israel has killed nearly 30,000 people and injured more than 70,000 others in Gaza since that October day.
US senators slam Biden’s strategy against Red Sea operations
Press TV – February 28, 2024
A bipartisan group of US senators has slammed President Joe Biden’s handling of the Yemeni army’s attacks against Israeli-linked vessels, as well as American and British ships in the Red Sea.
The senators on Tuesday contended Biden should seek congressional authorization for ongoing military action against the Yemen-based movement.
The United States has been carrying out near-daily strikes against the Houthi Ansarullah movement, who have said their attacks on shipping are in solidarity with Palestinians.
The Houthi Ansarullah movement said Yemen’s attacks against shipping in the Red Sea will only stop after the Israeli regime ends its aggression and blockade on the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
The American strikes have so far failed to halt the Yemeni attacks, which have upset global trade and raised shipping rates.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine said during a congressional hearing with Pentagon and State Department officials that he had serious concerns about the legal authority the Biden administration was relying on for the strikes but also what impact they were having.
“Trying to re-establish deterrence, I don’t think you’re going to do it if the 200 strikes become 400 strikes, 800 strikes, 1,200 strikes,” Kaine said.
“I think you will re-establish deterrence when we get a hostage deal that leads us to a truce, that leads us to humanitarian aid into Gaza, that leads us to the ability to discuss, whatever that truce period is, can be extended,” he added.
The Pentagon said on Tuesday that its strikes have so far destroyed or degraded 150 missiles and launchers along with radars, weapons storage areas and drones.
Yemen’s Red Sea operations would end in case a ceasefire is reached between the Israeli regime and the Gaza-based Hamas resistance movement, said Mohammed Abdul-Salam, who is also the chief negotiator of the Ansarullah movement.
He added that the situation would be reassessed if Israel ended its siege on Gaza and allowed humanitarian aid to enter the Palestinian territory.
Yemenis have declared their open support for Palestine’s struggle against the Israeli occupation since the regime launched a devastating war on Gaza on October 7 after resistance movements in the territory carried out the surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm on Israeli settlers and military forces in occupied Palestine.
The Yemeni Armed Forces have said they will not stop retaliatory strikes until unrelenting Israeli ground and aerial offensives in Gaza, which have killed nearly 30,000 people and wounded around 70,000, come to a complete end.
The maritime attacks have forced some of the biggest shipping and oil companies to suspend transit through one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes.
“The Constitution requires Congress to authorize acts of war. … We swore an oath to follow the Constitution. If we believe this is a just military action and I do, then we should authorize it,” Senator Chris Murphy, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Middle East subcommittee.
Murphy, a Democrat, said he would be in talks with his colleagues to introduce such an authorization.
Senator Todd Young, the subcommittee’s senior Republican, also questioned the Biden administration’s strategy.
“It’s imperative that the administration respond to these actions while demonstrating it is both a strategy for deterring aggression and appropriate legal doctrine,” said Young. “To date, I have not seen such a strategy put forward.”
The US Constitution gives Congress the right to authorize war, but US law gives the White House the authority to launch limited foreign military action.
The United States and the United Kingdom have been carrying out strikes against Yemen since early January after Washington and its allies offered Israel their full support amid attacks by Yemeni forces on Israeli-linked ships sailing to and from the occupied territories through the Red Sea.
Separately on Tuesday, the US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement that US “preemptive” strikes on Yemen on Monday had destroyed two anti-ship cruise missiles, three unmanned surface vessels and a drone in the Arab country.
It claimed that the destroyed missiles were being prepared to launch toward the Red Sea.
Two days earlier, the US and the UK said that they had targeted at least 18 military sites in eight locations across Yemen. The attacks included strikes against underground weapons and missile storage facilities, air defense systems, radars and a helicopter, they added.
