Is time really up for the Houthis?

Were recent strikes ordered by Trump intended as a warning to Tehran, or could they be a prelude to an expanded war? Al Majalla weighs in on the possible motives.

US President Donald Trump looks on as military strikes are launched against the Houthis in Yemen in this handout image released on March 15, 2025.
Reuters
US President Donald Trump looks on as military strikes are launched against the Houthis in Yemen in this handout image released on March 15, 2025.

Is time really up for the Houthis?

Recent US military strikes on Yemen, accompanied by a warning from President Donald Trump directed at the Houthis that ‘your time is up’ have prompted more questions than answers. So far, the US appears to have no intention of a ground invasion, with an anonymous US source telling CNN it would be limited to “a series of sustained and targeted strategic attacks.”

While the majority of Yemenis object to the widespread devastation the strikes inflicted on civilian infrastructure, others in the country would love to see the Houthis destroyed. But having said that, Yemenis—no matter their political affiliation—are wary of Israeli involvement in their country, as well as American and British military action on their behalf, and would much rather be given the ability to defeat the Houthis themselves.

But after nearly a decade of war, no one has been able to defeat the group militarily, nor have diplomatic efforts to reach a political solution worked, which begs the question: what is Washington’s goal here, and do they even have a game plan?

'All options on the table'

Comments made by US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz may give us a hint. Speaking Sunday on ABC’s This Week, he said the US did not rule out the use of force against Iran, either in relation to its support for Yemen’s Houthis or its potential development of a nuclear weapon, adding: “All options are always on the table with the president. But Iran needs to hear him loud and clear.”

The US has said it is targeting Houthis' military infrastructure, including manufacturing workshops, missile and drone launch platforms, land and naval mine production facilities, radar systems, training camps, and other military assets. By striking buildings within the group's security zone in Al-Jiraf and Shu’aub, it is clear that Washington’s focus is on eliminating key Houthi leadership, spanning first-, second-, and third-tier commanders.

The Al-Jiraf district is home to the Houthis' political bureau headquarters, the offices of its media arm, Al-Masirah TV, and the residences of several senior leaders. The neighbourhood, situated north of Sana’a, had previously been a hub of intense Houthi activity and was the first area in the city to be seized by the group’s militants during their invasion of Sana’a on 21 September 2014.

The list of military targets in Houthi-controlled areas has already been compiled by the Biden administration when the Pentagon was instructed to identify key Houthi leaders for potential strikes. US intelligence agencies were also directed to gather extensive data on their locations, movements, phone numbers, and those of their associates. However, the implementation of this plan was delayed due to Biden’s focus on his re-election campaign—a move that his successor, Donald Trump, later condemned as "pathetic" and lacking decisiveness.

The Houthis make up no more than 10% of Yemen’s population—which is estimated at around 40 million, both inside and outside the country. As such, the group lacks the legitimate mandate to declare war against any domestic or foreign entity unilaterally. But they control a vast and geographically complex area, larger than both Gaza and southern Lebanon combined. They also do not share a border with Israel, giving it a lot more distance from "the enemy".

While many Yemenis disagree with the Houthi approach, they also see the US strikes as strategically flawed

Greater manoeuvrability

This gives them greater manoeuvrability, affording them the time and space to recover more quickly from losses—whether material or human. Having said that, they clearly do not possess the military might needed to effectively take on the US. As one Yemeni politician described it, the Houthis are "like a fly trying to fight a giant elephant"—something their ally, Iran, is certainly aware of.

Israel's decapitation of Hezbollah's top-tier leadership and Ahmed al-Sharaa's toppling of the Assad government has left Iran's proxies weak and exposed, and the Houthis were largely left on their own in the fight against Israel. But rather than keep a low profile, its leadership stepped up its threats and rhetoric, giving Israel a four-day ultimatum to let humanitarian aid into Gaza or face renewed attacks on Israeli and American interests in the region.

'All eyes on Iran'

All eyes are now on Iran and how—or if—it will respond to the latest US strikes. It may try to diffuse tensions and ask the Houthis to rein in their attacks, but a US official told The Washington Post that the group is unlikely to heed Tehran's directives. Echoing Waltz's comments, the official said the strikes on Yemen were a warning to Iran, which could "soon become the next target"—a scenario that appears increasingly likely.

For his part, Houthi spokesperson Mohammed Abdul Salam condemned the US air strikes, describing them as a "blatant act of aggression against an independent state" and an "endorsement of Israel's oppressive blockade on Gaza." The senior Houthi official on the US terrorism watchlist asserted that "Yemen's naval blockade—imposed in solidarity with Gaza—is limited to Israeli shipping and will remain in effect until humanitarian aid is delivered to the people of Gaza, in accordance with the ceasefire agreement between the Palestinian resistance and the enemy entity."

For their part, Yemeni political and military experts remain sceptical that US strikes will be able to stop the Houthis from disrupting maritime trade in the waters of the Red Sea and Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.

AFP
A Houthi helicopter flies over the cargo ship Galaxy Leader as Houthi fighters walk on the deck of the ship in the Red Sea, on 20 November 2023.

Furthermore, they don't see a genuine American intention to dismantle Houthi rule. Instead, they suspect these powers may be deliberately keeping the group intact "to use as a tool to exert pressure on other countries in the region."

Flawed approach

And while they disagree with the Houthi maritime campaign—which, in their view, purely serves Iran's interests—they also see Washington's approach as hastily put together and strategically flawed. First, they see the attacks as only a prelude to an inevitable direct confrontation with Iran. Indeed, many talking heads in the West and Israel are openly lobbying for this, saying that unless the "head of the snake" (i.e. Iran) is severed, air strikes on Houthis will do little to change its behaviour.

Secondly, they see US strikes on Yemen as a way for Iran to buy more time to expedite its uranium enrichment, allowing it to race towards developing a nuclear weapon with the aim of recalibrating the balance of power in the region, which currently favours Israel.

For his part, Trump redesignated the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organisation after Biden had removed them from the list. This brought back crippling economic sanctions on Yemen, forcing many banks and money exchanges to relocate their headquarters from Sana'a to Aden—the country's temporary capital—to mitigate financial losses. And when a US ban on oil imports to the Hodeidah Port goes into effect on 2 April, a crippling fuel crisis will likely unfold in Houthi-controlled areas.

Yemenis have continuously suffered from a humanitarian crisis due to its long-running war over the past decade, and recent events have only exacerbated the poor living conditions in the country. As usual, the Yemeni people have to bear the consequences of political decisions made by external powers—a painful familiarity felt by many across the region.  

font change