The US has formally announced the launch of a new military operation in the Red Sea aimed at responding to attacks on commercial shipping by Yemen’s Houthis that started in response to the brutal Israeli assault on Gaza.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced the initiative, dubbed Operation Prosperity Guardian, while on a trip to the region and said the other countries taking part include the UK, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles, and Spain.
The Houthi attacks have forced some of the world’s largest shipping lines to suspend Red Sea transits, which risks a major impact on the global economy. The British energy giant BP announced Monday that it was stopping all shipments of oil and gas through the waters.
The Houthis, formally known as Ansar Allah, have vowed to target all ships heading to and from Israel and said the only way to “restore calm” to the region is through a lasting ceasefire in Gaza. The Houthis have shown no sign of backing down and announced on Monday that they launched two drone attacks on commercial vessels.
The US is considering taking military action against the Houthis, which would involve bombing Yemen. The US has backed a Saudi-UAE coalition against the Houthis since 2015, but it’s rare that the US takes direct military action against them.
Bloomberg reported that Saudi Arabia and the UAE are split on how the US should respond. The UAE wants military action and for the US to redesignate the Houthis as a “foreign terrorist organization,” which would make the implementation of a Yemen peace deal impossible.
For their part, the Saudis fear that military action could provoke more Houthi attacks and break the fragile truce that’s held relatively well in Yemen since April 2022. Before the ceasefire, the Houthis had launched multiple successful missile and drone attacks against Saudi oil facilities.
The waterway will be kept open. Houthi seem to want to restart their war Saudi Arabia by making these attacks. The Houthis have to know that Red Sea will not be shutdown regardless of what is happening in Gaza.
The Red Sea doesn’t have to be shut down for the attacks to have a major impact. All that is necessary for that is for insurers to raise rates and for shippers to hesitate to route as many voyages through Suez as they normally do.
And are you sure the Saudis are in a hurry to distract the Houthis right now?
I can only imagine the KSA finds itself in a dilly of a pickle right now.
A tentative truce with the Houthinese – one worth preserving. A tentative thawing of relations between the Kingdom and the IRI – valuable to both Riyadh and Tehran. And an ongoing ‘association’ (too early to say ‘friendship’) with the ASI, now in jeopardy because of Gaza.
That and Riyadh really hoping nobody in the USA slips Those Damning 28 Pages onto Discord anywhere near a Presidential election season.
Long-tail cat in a room fulla rocking-chairs, itellyouwhut.
Love your posts, uncle! Spy On This, did you notice the “itellyouwhut?” By the way, was it interesting that Bahrain was in the coalition and KSA was not?
what
CHICKENBUTT !
(Sorry; I have kids & yours was a perfect setup)
Bahrain is hosting US Fifth Fleet. No Red Sea country is participating.
Interesting! Do they have any carriers there? Are they looking for a Gulf of Tonkin like moment?
It is not a tentative truce. To set the record strait, Saudi Arabia, North Yemen (Houthis) and Southern secessionists signed it. Before October 7 , Saudi Arabia took it to UN SC, planning to ask for endorsement. US ibjected to tge deal reached withiutvits input, blocking Un SC endorsement.
Houthis have nothing to lose. Just to have anothet record straight. Houthis declared war on Israel. By interferig — this coalition is bbecominvg a beligerant on the sude of Israel. Declaration of war endangered Israel assets only.
I can only imagine the KSA finds itself in a dilly of a pickle right now.
A tentative truce with the Houthinese – one worth preserving. A tentative thawing of relations between the Kingdom and the IRI – valuable to both Riyadh and Tehran. And an ongoing ‘association’ (too early to say ‘friendship’) with the ASI, now in jeopardy because of Gaza.
That and Riyadh really hoping nobody in the USA slips Those Damning 28 Pages onto Discord anywhere near a Presidential election season.
Long-tail cat in a room fulla rocking-chairs, itellyouwhut.
That is true about the impact of increasing insurance rates. And that is how wars start.
I don’t think the Saudis want to restart the war. The Houthis I think are interested. We will see what happen when the bombs start to fall on Houthis’ positions.
We merp in forgetting that Western shippers are niot the only one available. Maerck will in particular risk a lot, They carry a gret desl of Chinese cargo to/from Europe via Egyptian and Saudi ports. Both British and Danish shippers are replaceable. They have no need to worry about being targeted, so no insurance hike.
Not at all. Yemen and Saudi are going to sign a permanent peace treaty early next year. This is Biden’s new project, the token Gulf participant is Bahrain with two life rafts.
It’s nice to take such people with us on side projects like that especially when other people that look like them have it coming. They need “Freedom and Democracy.” We are so nice, we never forget the little people.
The waterway will be kept open.
For fish maybe… Cargo vessels will be humping the Cape of Good Hope, though.
Interesting times.
The Straits of Gibraltar are almost as narrow as the Bab al-Mandab … with Arab Morocco on the south side and Algeria not that far away. The Algerian Legislature has already voted 100/100 to give the president of Algeria the authority to declare war on Israel.
Those ships diverting around the Cape of Good Hope are practically advertising that their cargoes are bound for Israel, self-selecting themselves as targets of the Arab economic war against Israel.
An alternative arrangement would be for the Houthis to set up a checkpoint at the straight where ships bound for Suez could check in and have their manifest inspected so that they could be cleared for safe passage.
War is war, but business is business.
An afterthought.
The modern battlefield has demonstrated abundant innovation: precision-guided munitions, drones of all kinds, and most recently powered hang-gliders.
Sophisticated anti-ship missiles meant for attacking warships are substantial overkill — not needed –when it comes to attacking unarmed merchant ships. A single, dirt-cheap quadcopter — an FPV/first-person-view drone — dropping the sort of munition seen used against tanks in the Ukraine conflict, could easily set ablaze an oil tanker passing through the Straits of Gibraltar. The threat of global economic disruption — oil prices instantly at $150 a barrel and shipping insurance through the roof
— might very well be all it would take to instantly end the Gaza conflict.
And this is but one of 1000 possibilities.
Welcome to the gauntlet. 🚀
“Those ships diverting around the Cape of Good Hope are practically advertising that their cargoes are bound for Israel, self-selecting themselves as targets of the Arab economic war against Israel.”
How are they “practically advertising” any such thing? Ship transit the Red Sea and the Suez Canal on their way to European markets. The distance via the Cape is a lot, lot longer. And the seas a lot rougher.
Of course you’re right, they are not necessarily headed for Israel. But the Houthis don’t know that. So if they check in at Hodeida and clear their manifest they can proceed in safety.
Business is business.
I’m not in charge of a shipping company so I don’t know the details, but I suspect if e.g. Maersk is deciding to take the Cape route, it makes cost sense to them.
And of course, making it harder to ship via the Red Sea raises prices in countries other than Israel. Which might create pressure on those regimes to press harder for peace.
If Iran stops shipping to Israel,then Israelis justified in stopping Iranian shipping.
“could easily set ablaze an oil tanker” You don’t know much about double haul oil tanker construction nor how hard it is to get crude oil to burn. And you assume that the merchant ships will remain unarmed.
The right oxidants, Timothy, and anything burns. Perchloric Acid will set soaking-wet wood on fire. Potassium Nitrate mixed into white sugar will burn better’n confetti (and smells like marshmallows !!)
Thanks uncle. You beat me to it..
I never said you can put crude oil on fire, I just said it is harder than most people think.
Top attack not a hull attack. And if you want to get the oil burning you just add a bit of oxidizer.
The vapor space above the oil in the tanks is filled with nitrogen to prevent ignition. (I know enough about the technical details.)
From Wikipedia: “Inert gas system: The system provides an inert gas (e.g., nitrogen) blanket in tanks in order to displace oxygen and prevent the development of a flammable atmosphere, which could enable a fire or explosion.”
I knew about it before going to Wikipedia. But I wanted to confirm that it was in fact nitrogen and not carbon dioxide.
I’m beginning to suspect that “Tim Burns” is one of a growing cadre of propaganda operatives spawned since the emergence of social media. His profile on discus is private, but he has few comments, so he is almost certainly a recent discus member. This suggests that he is a propaganda operative. One of an emerging group of Deep State-installed “perception management” operatives.
I suggest first, that everyone block “Tim Burns” and refuse to engage with him … unless and until he can establish that he is not a propaganda/censorship/perception management operative.
Second, I would suggest that the policy makers at antiwar.com consider their policy regarding defending against psychological operations masquerading as genuine participation in the discourse in the comments section.
Well Jeff, how do we know that you are not a propaganda operative yourself? The nice thing about this system is that you don’t have to read any of my comments. So when are you going to lead the charge and block me? Go ahead. Isolate yourself to your viewpoint, if that makes you feel better.
The simple fact that my view point does not agree with yours is your problem, not mine.
As long as you’re a real person and not a propaganda operative I have no problem.
As for me, I’ve been fighting the good fight here since 1997, bumping heads with Thomas ever since he showed up as moderator, all that long before social media was born, or the Twitter Files revealed how the government was fully engaged in “perception management” online.
Yea, you have problem with by views. You don’t like my views and you tried to get others to block me and even suggested that the system shut me down.
As I said you are free to block me, you will not be first. Live in a bubble if it makes you feel better.
I’m pretty sure social media was around before I was a moderator (but not before I was a commenter). I THINK it was 2010 or 2011 that I got approached about moderating comments (and, full disclosure, getting paid for it instead of being an unpaid volunteer as I had been for several years before that doing other stuff).
There’d been some kind of kerfuffle, and the fallout was that there would be a moderator or the site would just not have commenting. Apparently I was the only one willing to take the job. And while I don’t like deleting comments or banning commenters, I do like that it gives me an excuse to be here on and off all day long 😀
“Second, I would suggest that the policy makers at antiwar.com consider their policy regarding defending against psychological operations masquerading as genuine participation in the discourse in the comments section.”
If we have any reason to believe such a thing is taking place, we’ll certainly address it.
You fantasizing that everyone who disagrees with you is some kind of state agent is not the same thing as that actually being true.
“You fantasizing that everyone who disagrees with you is some kind of state agent is not the same thing as that actually being true.”
“Suspecting” not fantasizing. Between the deep state’s censorship effort as exposed by the Twitter files, and the certainty of Israeli Hasbara, it is entirely reasonable for me to wonder who is real and who is a propaganda agent.
Best wishes to you and yours Thomas this holiday season.
And to you and yours!
I think Timothy is a genuine person. Not a bot (his grammar is too good) and not A.I. (his arguments are not good enough).
This site does need alternate-viewpoints and dissenting opinions. Would that they were of better quality, but aversions to facts & evidence, “but muh feelinses”, and poor skills at discourse are hallmarks of those inventing and insisting upon their own flavours of reality.
Without commenting on any particular commenters or their positions, it’s worth noting that there’s absolutely nothing on Earth so stupid that it won’t be truly and firmly believed by at least some people.
Thanks for the complement on my grammar. I never considered my grammar to be a strong suit. I know my spelling stinks.
They will not restsrt war with Saudi Arabia. They signed peace deal. War is in nobody’s interest. Houthis are not shutting down Red Sea. European shippers are doing it vokuntarily.
Houthis declared war on Israel .— and are attacking Israeli assets only.
Seems like it would be more cost effective to just have Israel stop bombing Gaza, given the US is bankrolling the whole operation. Running and operating all these warships is expensive, not to mention if the US is foolish enough to send troops into Yemen and possibly Lebanon. Seems like little Israel is a very costly child to maintain and keep happy.
Read ages back (early 00’s maybe ?) that the USA buying oil from Saddam at $400/barrel would STILL have cost less over time than the American invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Sometimes it’s not about saving money.
That is probably true considering how little oil the US buys from Iraq.
Well, that’s the thing — the oil companies are able to shift their acquisition and security costs to the taxpayers. THEY didn’t have to pay $400 a barrel. The consumers paid that $400 a barrel, just not at the pump.
Yes,it is very costly,but pirates must be dealt with.
Wait!? You made me google search “Seychelles?” Wikipedia calls it “the smallest country in Africa” with “less than a 100,000 inhabitants!” Are you telling me they’re so enraged with “Yemeni terrorism” that they’re sending their military to attack Yemen, one of the most impoverished and starving countries in the world, for Israel? I now feel guilty that I didn’t feel as enraged especially when my own “Freedom and Democracy” are on the line.
it’s rare that the US takes direct military action against them.
Unless they have a wedding.
fish in a barrel
My money is on the fish.
Hopefully they will be as successful in stopping the Houthis as Zelensky was in driving Russia out of Crimea!
Piracy can not and should not be tolerated.
Nor genocide.
“ Operation Prosperity Guardian”?!!
bunkum and balderdash.
by boobs and bastards …
If they piss the Houthis off too much, they’ll just dump a whole lot of mines in the waterway and really impact the shipping for a long time. Better watch out …
I wonder how effective sea mines are these days. I’ve heard concerns about their effect in the Black Sea, but haven’t noticed a bunch of stories about them actually damaging ships. They may be moving toward obsolescence like tanks and manned aircraft are.
Mines only temporary block shipping. And people who want to expand the war by mining the shipping lanes forget this action impacts both the sellers and buyers of oil. The international communities will not allow this to occur.
Mining is practically unstoppable …
It is? Don’t you need ships and planes to plant the mines? If I was in charge of the anti-mining campaign I would go after those vessels and destroy them at their ports/air fields and when they arrive over the target area.
This is very old tech … you can use small boats, minimize electronics, work at night only, etc. to minimize risk of detection.
Again, military success is very different from commercial suppression success … the latter needs a very few successful strikes to make a big impact on shipping.
Yes, it’s very old tech.
So are muzzle-loading smoothbore muskets. Do you see a lot of those on today’s battlefield, and if so how are they working out?
There’s a lot to be said for old tech … it has much less chance of electronic interference, detection, and disabling.
But we shall see …
“work at night only” “small boats”. This is 2023, night would provide zero coverage at sea. And small boats will still be sunk.
Someone managed to get to Nord Stream 2, so apparently it is possible to do small-scale operations undetected.
Got any links I can use to read up on that?
In the 1980s, the Iranians seem to have managed to damage a grand total of two ships with sea mines — the first of them before the US sent minesweepers to the Gulf.
Have the mines gotten better since then? How about the detection/destruction tools?
Have the mines gotten better since then?
Has the sweeping got any cheaper or more effective?
I doubt that it’s gotten cheaper. I suspect that it’s become more effective.
And the mines may have as well. There are presumably limits to what you can do in terms of penetrating power, etc., with something that’s floating in a surrounding medium of fairly light pressure, but maybe explosive that’s more powerful in lesser quantities, ceramic penatrators/shrapnel instead of metal, etc.
I’m interested in knowing, but the reason I suspect that the mines may have not been especially improved and are seen as increasingly obsolete is that anti-ship missiles are getting better, longer-range, and available to more parties, and of course there are aquatic drones. A dumb mine just may not be the way to go anymore.
Likely right, Tom … but this is attempting to stop a commercial venture. And if it works to up insurance rates and deter conservative shipping lines and crews from an unnecessarily risky route, they may work as intended to deter if not stop shipping.
Yes, it’s a calculation problem for shippers — does the risk and the higher insurance cost outweigh the longer shipping times and the dangers of the southern waters, or vice versa?
Stop it cold. Then a battle between the mines and the very expensive mine-sweepers.
1. Place ?’s on squares you haven’t identified.
2. Place flags on squares where you know there is a mine.
3. Look for high-numbered hint squares (a 5 or a 6) indicating a lot of mines adjacent.
4. At the start, hope to click on an empty square that will reveal a lot of empty squares & make minesweeping much easier.
Thanks, Windows 95 !!
Now I’m waiting for a “Gulf of Tonkin” event….
To add to this amazing coalition. Yhere is one symbolic Gulf country present, Bahrain. Seychelles is another symbolic addition to the collection of Eurolean vassals US collected. It is embarrasing.
The debate on oresumed Saydi -UAE split is highly irrelevant — it only illlustrates that NO RED SEA COUNTRY is a member of alliance. Not Saudi Arabia or Egypt.
The decision by these Western shippers to not sail through Red Sea is purely political. They are deliberately punishing Egypt and Saudi Arabia — as those ships will not be deluverung to Saudi port of Jeddah or be passing theough Suez canal. It will affect their revenues.
Reality is — Houthis have targeted only Israeli bound ships, as Houthis declared a war on Israell.
Houthis in fact have nothing to lose. Having signed peace deal with Saudi Arabia (not just truce), snd having all parties sign (Saudi Arabia, North Yemen (Houthis) and Southern secessionists — the war is over. Saudis took it to U.N for ratificatiion, and US objected to it! That was before Octoet 7. Why did US object to peace ? Two reasons. One, it was achieved without US interests being included, and two, US interests in Bab Al-Mandeb straits are disappointed.
Thus. this peace can be implemented aming the parties, and due to US ibjectikn would not have been endorsed by UN SC.
In fact, it hardly matters. Iranian nuclear deal was endorsed — and broken by US.
This frees up Houthis to declare war on Israe, and attack Israel assets. US thought this to be an opportunity to insert itself into Red Sea. But by not having ANY Red Sea countries participate —- it looses legitimacy.
This is a Western countries attemot at blocade of mainly Egypt and Saudi Arabis for their non-cooperating position on Gaza slaughter. It is hard to imagine a value to US, It is more of a spite, than a policy.
I had an odd thought. Just a detail to add to the discussion.
The northern route through the Arctic Ocean is already substantially shorter than the southern route through the Suez Canal. While it is the middle of winter, a convoy of ships led by an ice breaker could make that transit as an alternative to running the Suez gauntlet.
And one more little bit.
When the Russian gas was turned off and at the start of the Ukraine/Russia conflict, a whole fleet of liquefied natural gas ships — I think some 20 or more — was anchored off of Spain, waiting to deliver replacement natural gas at premium prices to Europe.
If the Arab resistance wanted to motivate the US vassals of Europe to take a stronger position regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, those ships would make a tempting target, particularly in the middle of winter.
There are 1000 different ways this situation could get ugly strange.