In geopolitics, theories often emerge as guiding principles, attempting to explain the complex dynamics of international relations and power structures. Among these, the Theory of Hegemonic Stability has long held sway, suggesting that a singular world order, led by a dominant superpower, is essential for maintaining global order and stability. This theory, deeply rooted in the political chessboard of nations, found its most profound embodiment in the post-Cold War era with the United States at the helm, signifying a unipolar world order.
However, the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, which once balanced the scales, unravelled a series of events that gradually exposed the flaws and contradictions inherent in this theory. As we journeyed through the early decades of the 21st century, it became increasingly evident that this U.S.-led order, often heralded by Western European allies, was steering the world not towards unassailable peace but towards a precipice of escalating regional conflicts. These conflicts, spanning from Europe to the Middle East and stretching across the Indian and Pacific Oceans, have ominously nudged the world towards the brink of a third world war.
In response to what is perceived as a U.S.-led and Western European-supported global treasure hunt, several nations have turned to the theory of offensive realism to shield their interests and sovereignty. Offensive realism is a theory in international relations suggesting that states must always seek power and act aggressively to survive in an inherently anarchic international system. This strategic shift, seen in countries like Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, and Syria, has shown a level of success in counterbalancing hegemonic aspirations. More recently, lesser-explored groups like Yemen’s Houthis and various Palestinian resistance forces have begun to employ the tenets of offensive realism, seeking to leverage it for their gains.
The Houthi movement, or Ansar Allah, in Yemen, represents a particularly intriguing case study in this geopolitical shift. Their actions, notably disrupting shipping in the Red Sea, have elicited a significant response from the United States, including the launch of Operation Prosperity Guardian. In this article, we delve into the complexities of the Houthi movement, exploring its strategies, motivations, and the broader implications of its actions in the volatile tapestry of global politics. As we unpack the layers of this less-studied group, we aim to provide a nuanced analysis of how the Ansar Allah movement is reshaping regional dynamics and challenging established geopolitical theories.
The Houthi movement, formally known as Ansar Allah, originated in the early 1990s in northern Yemen, evolving from a theological movement into a formidable political force. Initially, it was a response to perceived marginalization of the Zaidi Shia Muslim community, advocating for greater autonomy in the Saada Governorate. Their dissent was amplified by the deepening socio-economic disparities and political instability in Yemen, conditions that were exacerbated after the 2011 Arab Spring.
By 2014, the Houthis had capitalized on widespread discontent, taking control of Sana’a, Yemen’s capital, and eventually leading to the ongoing civil war. This conflict escalated dramatically with the intervention of a Saudi-led coalition, supported by the United States, in 2015. The coalition’s objective was to restore the internationally recognized government, ousted by the Houthis.
The relentless conflict, marked by airstrikes and ground battles, plunged Yemen into a humanitarian crisis characterized by widespread famine and a crippling economic blockade. Despite these adversities, the Houthi movement demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability. They evolved into a battle-hardened force, employing asymmetric warfare tactics and leveraging alliances, notably with Iran, to bolster their military capabilities.
Their strategic use of drone and missile attacks on Saudi infrastructure and their ability to disrupt critical shipping lanes in the Red Sea, highlight their growing sophistication and assertiveness. The Houthis’ transition from a local insurgent group to a significant regional actor underscores the complex interplay of local grievances, regional politics, and international power dynamics.
However, the Houthis have recently garnered significant international attention by asserting themselves as active participants in the escalating conflict between Israel and Gaza. Their initial foray involved launching an array of loitering munitions, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles towards Israel. This bold move was soon followed by a strategic blockade, targeting Israeli-owned or operated vessels navigating through the Red Sea. The group’s declaration of a complete closure of the shipping route to Eilat’s port marked a significant escalation, profoundly impacting regional trade and military dynamics.
This maneuver by the Houthis has precipitated a crisis in the US’s hegemonic status. America’s foremost objective has been to contain the Israel-Palestine conflict, preventing its escalation into a full-fledged regional war. However, the involvement of the Houthis, coupled with Hezbollah’s participation, transforms the conflict into a regional affair, albeit one restrained by diplomatic efforts and international pressure.
In response, the United States announced the formation of a multinational naval task force in the Red Sea. Despite expectations of broad Arab support, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain emerged as the sole Arab participant. This limited coalition underscores the challenges facing U.S. diplomacy and its waning influence in orchestrating regional alliances.
As diplomatic efforts by the United States to contain the conflict continue to falter, it becomes increasingly imperative for the U.S. to reconsider its unconditional support for Israel. The current trajectory, marked by rampant violence, threatens to undermine the very foundations of international institutions that uphold U.S. hegemony. Should this support persist unchecked, there is a real risk that these institutions, and the global order they represent could collapse, akin to a house of cards. Therefore, the onus falls heavily on the United States to exert pressure on Israel to de-escalate tensions. Failing to do so not only perpetuate the conflict but also risks eroding the global leadership role the U.S. has long sought to maintain in human rights and democracy.
——-
Written by Rajeev Ahmed
Geopolitical Analyst, Strategic Thinker and Editor at geopolits.com