Since two days, the USA and Great Britain are ‘bombing Yemen’. That is: the ‘militants’ of the Houthi ‘rebel’ movement in control over the northern parts of that country. Unsurprisingly – perhaps also because I’ve authored two books about air warfare over Yemen of the last 70 years (
They are in the wrong for attacking international shipping, but how much US/UK/others fight back will be based on how much keeping the shipping lanes open is worth to them.
Fundamental here is once again the usual suspect: Israel. As long as the West is blindly supporting Israel, and disregarding what other Middle Easterners want, it's playing straight into hands of the IRGC/Iran, and thus such of allied movements like Houthis, Hezbollah etc.
As for Yemen: any kind of a solution there is meanwhile unthinkable without the Saudis and Emiratis - and thus the West - accepting the fact that the Houthis are in control of the 'north'. So far, they are all refusing to accept even the Houthi right to power-sharing, which is why our media continues to insist on describing this 'group' as 'movement', but never as 'in control of the north'.
...which in turn means that the Houthis are left in similar position like Palestinians: without an option but to extremise ever more.
What so necessary was a resume of things in these long Yemen’s “affaire”.
If West (these mean clown governments) want to survive all these onslaughts (Ukraine, Gaza, some parts of Africa and, of course, Yemen) need to check ASAP its alliances and “friend or foe” mechanisms.
Personally I dont think that «Solution» solves anything. And it is genocide to force Israelis out of their country. Even if we accept that Israel was created as a settler state. But I think we should avoid throwing gasoline on the problem by trying to force our Solution on the locals. In the long run all partiets nede to find ways of liming with their neighbours. Maybe they do it better on their ovn without external meddling. And good intentions are not enough. As a Norwegian I have seen Norwegian peace support end up totally wrecked in Palestine, SriLanka, Latin America... and we have not used any cruise missiles in those processes.
I very much agree with you. My comment was about that it is wrong to blame Israel for all the problems in the region. I don’t think that destroying Israel would solve anything.
I also very much appreciate Norwegian peace efforts, it’s a shame it didn’t work out.
Israel is not the real reason, it's just a pretense (cover) to for the leaders in that area to fanatize crowd and it works very well. So, a peace in Palestine - Israel would solve nothing itself, just make things much easier for the Westerns concerns.
Peace in Palestine-Israel would solve Palestine-Israel problem and give the peace to Palestine-Israel people :)
But otherwise I think you’re right - almost every actor uses it in its own interests from the very beginning.
Even Russia voted for Israel in 1948 believing that the new country would be socialist and would help to decline the British influence in the Middle East.
NOPE: I do not say 'Israel must go'. I say: EVERYBODY has exactly the same privileges and rights, and must be treated in exactly the same fashion.
It can't be that Israel can run a genocide on Palestinians, and maintain an Apartheid state, and the West is wholeheartedly supporting this. As long as this is the case, we have no right at all to complain about all the possible dictators in the Middle East (nor their misdeeds).
For the last 75+ years, and especially right now, the West is pursuing 'Israel first and above all, regardless the consequences' politics. The country can do whatever it likes, it can violate all international laws and regulations, commit countless crimes - and there are absolutely no consequences for it. In the long term, this is simply mindless, because it is completely ignoring the rights of the vast majority of the people in the Middle East, and - unsurprisingly - playing into the hands of all sorts of extermists.
Sigh. It's times like this I have to wonder if being an isolationalist isn't such a bad idea. Then i slap myself and get back to reality. More proof of humanity's ability to screw things up.
Military commanders of naval forces off Yemen are not in control of the politics: they're following orders of their political masters. These political masters are the people we're electing into our governments.
....and after 106 years of BS-itting around with forcing Middle Easterners to accept Western dominance imposed upon them by the means of violence, it's on time for us, and thus our political masters to realise that we cannot impose our will upon the Middle Easterners.
With other words: it's about the time to quit fighting endless wars in the Middle East and let the people sort out themselves on their own.
The Houthi problem is somewhat parallel to the problem of the Barbary pirates of the 19th century and the Somali pirates of the 20th. Neither could be allowed to continue their mischief unhindered but neither situation presented an easy solution.
First of all any of the issues in modern Yemen are really the result of Pan-Arab Nationalists and Whabbis with the support of the House of Saud. Toss in some Communism courtesy of Russia and now Shia regional meddling, this is mostly a home cooked stew. I will argue, that it's the Yemenis who are interfering in other peoples business. The war in Gaza is not their war and the only thing they have in common with Palestinians is religion and the inability to govern well. There is no way the world can allow the attacks to continue, we are linked by trade. India alone has 10 warships in the region.
It is very much in the wheelhouse of the military commander to offer up military options, which are : Do nothing, sink/shoot down involved vessels, launch amphibious assaults or conduct airstrikes. It was pretty clear the US and KSA did not want to carry out a response and was likely scrambling to find diplomatic solutions, hence the frustrations of other allies with them. It's also clear the Houthi rebuffed any attempts to negotiate a end to these wanton attacks on international shipping.
As far as the west "meddling", if it was not for the efforts of the west they would be a massive oil spill from the OSFSV that would have happened thanks to the stupidity of the Houthi. The Houthi certainly know how to piddle in their own cornflakes.
Hey Tom. So I’m not sure do you say USA and Brits having problems determining correct targets or they just don’t care and anything for a good picture? I don’t see why it’s difficult to find and destroy radar and launch sites?
1.) After eight years of facing an 'air policing' campaign run by the Saudis, Emiratis and allies, Houthis are experts in avoiding air strikes even by latest air power.
2.) Just like the Saudis and allies experienced all sorts of problems when trying to find the Houthis - and that with US, British and other support - during that eight-years-long-air-policing campaign, and Israel proved unable to know where to hit the Hamas, PIJ and others in the Gaza Strip (so also despite extensive US aid) - also there is no reason to asses that the USA and UK nowadays have more clue what and where to strike in Yemen.
3.) Radars and launchers deployed by the Houthis are anything else than 'typical military grade material'. They are including all sorts of non-military radars, and very simple launchers usually installed on commercial trucks.
....and even if: the terrain of Yemen is so rugged, it's very easy to hide such radars and launchers. Mind that in 8 years of their air-policing campaign, and despite US and allied support, the Saudis and allied have managed to destroy less than a dozen of Houthi-operated military-grade launchers for ballistic missiles.
So, the actual question is: what is making anybody convinced the USA and the British - and then the Israelis - are going to do so much better now?
Well , then i have only one question "What is all this military high tech is about?" if after spending billions of dollars they fail to track and kill simple military target.
The tools to beat Chinese or Russian military are different than those that you need for those kind of mission. Guess why Turkey developed the Bayrakdar the way it is. For exactly that kind of mission in the rugged, mountainous terrain in their east to fight the kurds. That's why they are not used on the battlefield in Ukraine any longer. Developed for a different kind of war with no aerial threats.
Primarily to stuff pockets of different 'shareholders' and hedgefond-managers full of taxpayer's money. In this regards, the entire currently valid scheme of 'defence spending' can be described as 'money laundering'.
The best solution is likely to just funnel arms and support to the Houthi opposition until the Houthis cry uncle. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. There are no permanent solutions to ideologically driven conflicts. Suppression by any means is the best strategy
In your post on FB you say Houthi can restock their stocks of rockets and other equipment in a matter of weeks. How is it possible? Given their geographical location? The sea is blocked by US ships, the land is blocked by rival countries as well. I do not get it.
The answer is, IMHO, obvious: smuggling. They've managed to smuggle immense volumes of missiles and UAVs from Iran over 8 years of blockade by the Saudi-led coalition, supported by USA and allies.
Not only small boats. Heck, at the height of the Saudi-led intervention, amid all the Western complaints about famine in Yemen - and thousands really starving to death - rich people in Sana'a had no problem to buy themselves everything, including ice cream imported from the UAE. It was 'just' very expensive.
...and certain parts of Yemen continued exporting food to Saudi Arabia and Oman. Indeed, because the air policing was targeting almost all the trucks and petrol stations between, for example, Sa'ada and Sana'a, it was easier to export food to Saudi Arabia, than to bring it from northern Yemen to Sana'a.
So, now that was 'just food'. And ice cream. You think that was all that was 'smuggled' around the country?
Oman is not exactly a rival country. And while the Eastern part of Yemen is nominally under Coalition control (whatever that means given how the coalition is often tearing itself appart), good luck effectively controlling this immense stretch of desertic area.
Smuggling through small boats is an other possibility. Funnily enough the Houthis control the larger part of the Western coast thanks to Western diplomatic effort which actively denied a Saudi coalition victory at Hodeida in 2018.
Finally, a big philosophy in Iranian involvement is to empower local actors and favourite local "DIY" manufacturing of crude but effective design. Thus reducing the amount of smuggled components to the strict necessity.
In this sense it is the polar opposite of Western States who like to sell their overpriced weapon systems to Gulf princes (especially fighter jets) yet deny them less shiny but key systems (for ex: everything you need to sustain a Western style air campaign) in order to keep full control of their "partner". It is almost a second nature leading to absurd situations such as when the US built from scratch the Afghan National Army (ANA) and made it incapable to carry on its own the very war the US ordered it to fight.
It`s impossible for the west to do something there diplomatically, they tried this for mouths. Obama non-involvement policy also failed. Russia, Iran and China don`t search for deescalation, that is the reason it will not stop. The only solution is use of force. Let`s hope this light jab will have enough impact to scare them and regulate the situation.
Mind letting me know about any kind of a serious diplomatic effort by the 'West' in regards of the Houthis?
I mean: I hope you have a good reason to say that the West 'tried there diplomatically, for months'.
....and Oblabla simply abandoned Syria to the IRGC - in order to gain fame for signing the JPCOA, and irrespectively of this opening the doors for the Russian military intervention in the country, and the flight of millions of Syrians (and thus the 'refugee crisis' in the EU).
....while 'the only solution is use of force'-strategy is pursued for 106 years (at least), with results as we can see them.
Look at what happened in Iran, Syria, and Afghanistan when they tried different approaches. Things might work if the other side cooperates, but if they don't, it can be seen as weakness. Obama aimed for a Palestinian state, and now things are even worse. Avoiding direct conflict with Iran led to problems. Maybe it's time to stick to the tried-and-true methods that worked for centuries instead of creating new strategies that don't. After all people thinking did not really involved.
What of that in Iran, Syria, or Afghanistan was 'diplomacy'?
And when did Obama aim for a Palestinian state?
....and there are only two reasons why the USA are avoiding a conflict with Iran: it's too big, and meanwhile has nukes.
....while the only 'tried-and-true' methods applied in the Middle East are always the same, and that yes, for centuries. They can all be sumarised with one word: violence.
People in those countries didn't need just talk, aid, or empty promises; they wanted someone to bring stability so they could live normal lives. Despite the West's ideals, Iran stepped in and achieved that, with all available methods. Even if Iran has nuclear capabilities, they wouldn't use them recklessly. The key is to make it clear that crossing certain lines won't go unchecked, targeting their weapon facilities, revealing vulnerabilities to their supporters, and acting before they do. Perception plays a crucial role in life.
Hi, Tom. This message is about the Ukraine war. Could you reveal your point of view in the next Q&A on the next problem? The spoke person of PSU Yuriy Ihnat insisted in his interview that VKS RF use KAB, also Genstab-U use this definition in its daily report. You said that the Russians have a small amount of KABs. Do they set up production KABs?
Thank you for the extended background to the conflict. It may be compressed, but its certainly more than most of the media here is reporting. Have to give credit to the National Broadcasting reporter (as main stream as it gets in Norway) who on prime time said that the Houties is an experienced and capable force who will not be intimidated or beaten back by such efforts. No background, but clear Message there: this will not Work.
Also interesting what you write about the Saudi backed invation. They obviously were smarter than I thought, well my prejudices stand corrected. Based on what you said the most logical step would be to get those forces fully back, accept Houti regime in Yemen and try to behave decent against them. But then we still have the Gaza conflict fanning this.
American bureaucrats: doing stuff for the sake of looking in control. Not a bright way to deal with groups like the Houthis. Or Taliban.
The more I review the intellectual underpinnings of "Western" foreign policy, the stupider the leaders of the silly fantasy look. Shamming, all of them.
And all this because no one will finally put a leash on Israel, another country run by corrupt cravens. As if Israel's best successes haven't always been a result of patient, quiet counterintelligence work instead of playing apartheid with the IDF.
Thank you for this article Tom. Alone that someone is writing about different schools of islam and not putting everything into one bucket (like Wahabism and Suffi into the Sunni pot) is putting more depth than any newspaper journalist will ever will. Furthermore describing the root of the problem back to the historical development and closing off why people are following the Houthi (well, nobody likes to get bombed) makes this the best piece I read about this conflict by a far distance.
It says '(where, BTW, much of population is consisting of the Shi’a)', I've interpreted that as a majority or at the least 50/50... I now see I could've interpreted it better too :-) sorry!
Thanks Mr. Cooper for your attempt to help us understanding the world.
thank you. and how Houthis should be dealth with?
They are in the wrong for attacking international shipping, but how much US/UK/others fight back will be based on how much keeping the shipping lanes open is worth to them.
Fundamental here is once again the usual suspect: Israel. As long as the West is blindly supporting Israel, and disregarding what other Middle Easterners want, it's playing straight into hands of the IRGC/Iran, and thus such of allied movements like Houthis, Hezbollah etc.
As for Yemen: any kind of a solution there is meanwhile unthinkable without the Saudis and Emiratis - and thus the West - accepting the fact that the Houthis are in control of the 'north'. So far, they are all refusing to accept even the Houthi right to power-sharing, which is why our media continues to insist on describing this 'group' as 'movement', but never as 'in control of the north'.
...which in turn means that the Houthis are left in similar position like Palestinians: without an option but to extremise ever more.
What so necessary was a resume of things in these long Yemen’s “affaire”.
If West (these mean clown governments) want to survive all these onslaughts (Ukraine, Gaza, some parts of Africa and, of course, Yemen) need to check ASAP its alliances and “friend or foe” mechanisms.
Thanks for your work.
So, let’s say Israel is gone. All Jews are left to some other countries. There is only Palestine from the river to the sea.
Do you really believe that all the problems in the Middle East will be solved and all the wars will end?
Personally I dont think that «Solution» solves anything. And it is genocide to force Israelis out of their country. Even if we accept that Israel was created as a settler state. But I think we should avoid throwing gasoline on the problem by trying to force our Solution on the locals. In the long run all partiets nede to find ways of liming with their neighbours. Maybe they do it better on their ovn without external meddling. And good intentions are not enough. As a Norwegian I have seen Norwegian peace support end up totally wrecked in Palestine, SriLanka, Latin America... and we have not used any cruise missiles in those processes.
I very much agree with you. My comment was about that it is wrong to blame Israel for all the problems in the region. I don’t think that destroying Israel would solve anything.
I also very much appreciate Norwegian peace efforts, it’s a shame it didn’t work out.
It would have been Nice if the peace efforts did Work out. But the problem is to make the acceptable as local solutions.
Israel is not the real reason, it's just a pretense (cover) to for the leaders in that area to fanatize crowd and it works very well. So, a peace in Palestine - Israel would solve nothing itself, just make things much easier for the Westerns concerns.
Peace in Palestine-Israel would solve Palestine-Israel problem and give the peace to Palestine-Israel people :)
But otherwise I think you’re right - almost every actor uses it in its own interests from the very beginning.
Even Russia voted for Israel in 1948 believing that the new country would be socialist and would help to decline the British influence in the Middle East.
Funny to think about it today.
Yep, and Israel supported Iran in Iran-Iraq war, funny as it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_in_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War
Exactly :)
Oh gosh... OK, once again...
NOPE: I do not say 'Israel must go'. I say: EVERYBODY has exactly the same privileges and rights, and must be treated in exactly the same fashion.
It can't be that Israel can run a genocide on Palestinians, and maintain an Apartheid state, and the West is wholeheartedly supporting this. As long as this is the case, we have no right at all to complain about all the possible dictators in the Middle East (nor their misdeeds).
For the last 75+ years, and especially right now, the West is pursuing 'Israel first and above all, regardless the consequences' politics. The country can do whatever it likes, it can violate all international laws and regulations, commit countless crimes - and there are absolutely no consequences for it. In the long term, this is simply mindless, because it is completely ignoring the rights of the vast majority of the people in the Middle East, and - unsurprisingly - playing into the hands of all sorts of extermists.
Top Cooper . . .
Yes?
Yess
Sigh. It's times like this I have to wonder if being an isolationalist isn't such a bad idea. Then i slap myself and get back to reality. More proof of humanity's ability to screw things up.
So your in Command of the naval forces off of Yemen, what would you do differently?
Military commanders of naval forces off Yemen are not in control of the politics: they're following orders of their political masters. These political masters are the people we're electing into our governments.
....and after 106 years of BS-itting around with forcing Middle Easterners to accept Western dominance imposed upon them by the means of violence, it's on time for us, and thus our political masters to realise that we cannot impose our will upon the Middle Easterners.
With other words: it's about the time to quit fighting endless wars in the Middle East and let the people sort out themselves on their own.
The Houthi problem is somewhat parallel to the problem of the Barbary pirates of the 19th century and the Somali pirates of the 20th. Neither could be allowed to continue their mischief unhindered but neither situation presented an easy solution.
First of all any of the issues in modern Yemen are really the result of Pan-Arab Nationalists and Whabbis with the support of the House of Saud. Toss in some Communism courtesy of Russia and now Shia regional meddling, this is mostly a home cooked stew. I will argue, that it's the Yemenis who are interfering in other peoples business. The war in Gaza is not their war and the only thing they have in common with Palestinians is religion and the inability to govern well. There is no way the world can allow the attacks to continue, we are linked by trade. India alone has 10 warships in the region.
It is very much in the wheelhouse of the military commander to offer up military options, which are : Do nothing, sink/shoot down involved vessels, launch amphibious assaults or conduct airstrikes. It was pretty clear the US and KSA did not want to carry out a response and was likely scrambling to find diplomatic solutions, hence the frustrations of other allies with them. It's also clear the Houthi rebuffed any attempts to negotiate a end to these wanton attacks on international shipping.
As far as the west "meddling", if it was not for the efforts of the west they would be a massive oil spill from the OSFSV that would have happened thanks to the stupidity of the Houthi. The Houthi certainly know how to piddle in their own cornflakes.
F*#@ing-A dude.......WOW!!!!!!!
Ever think about teaching.....oh wait....that is what you just did.
Yemeni & Houthis 101
My thanks for filling my addled brain with data that it did not have before.
:o)
Hey Tom. So I’m not sure do you say USA and Brits having problems determining correct targets or they just don’t care and anything for a good picture? I don’t see why it’s difficult to find and destroy radar and launch sites?
1.) After eight years of facing an 'air policing' campaign run by the Saudis, Emiratis and allies, Houthis are experts in avoiding air strikes even by latest air power.
2.) Just like the Saudis and allies experienced all sorts of problems when trying to find the Houthis - and that with US, British and other support - during that eight-years-long-air-policing campaign, and Israel proved unable to know where to hit the Hamas, PIJ and others in the Gaza Strip (so also despite extensive US aid) - also there is no reason to asses that the USA and UK nowadays have more clue what and where to strike in Yemen.
3.) Radars and launchers deployed by the Houthis are anything else than 'typical military grade material'. They are including all sorts of non-military radars, and very simple launchers usually installed on commercial trucks.
....and even if: the terrain of Yemen is so rugged, it's very easy to hide such radars and launchers. Mind that in 8 years of their air-policing campaign, and despite US and allied support, the Saudis and allied have managed to destroy less than a dozen of Houthi-operated military-grade launchers for ballistic missiles.
So, the actual question is: what is making anybody convinced the USA and the British - and then the Israelis - are going to do so much better now?
Well , then i have only one question "What is all this military high tech is about?" if after spending billions of dollars they fail to track and kill simple military target.
https://youtu.be/pbvyIPrhKjQ?si=dT1T9W7IwBz0zWLc
The tools to beat Chinese or Russian military are different than those that you need for those kind of mission. Guess why Turkey developed the Bayrakdar the way it is. For exactly that kind of mission in the rugged, mountainous terrain in their east to fight the kurds. That's why they are not used on the battlefield in Ukraine any longer. Developed for a different kind of war with no aerial threats.
What is all this military high tech about?
Primarily to stuff pockets of different 'shareholders' and hedgefond-managers full of taxpayer's money. In this regards, the entire currently valid scheme of 'defence spending' can be described as 'money laundering'.
The best solution is likely to just funnel arms and support to the Houthi opposition until the Houthis cry uncle. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. There are no permanent solutions to ideologically driven conflicts. Suppression by any means is the best strategy
What do you think will happen to the region when/if the world goes renewable and nobody cares about oil and this Middle East?
No idea. But, this is not going to happen in the time of our lives, so: 'doesn't matter'.
Western involvement in the ME predates oil based economy.
One of the oldest Western "humanitarian intervention" was the French expedition of 1860 in Lebanon and Syria ...
France used the pretext of communal violences between Maronite Christians and Druze to instigate itself once more into the Levant.
Funny note, back then Druzes were presented a vilain "sect" of Muslims. Now they mostly emphasis that they are totally not Muslims instead ...
In your post on FB you say Houthi can restock their stocks of rockets and other equipment in a matter of weeks. How is it possible? Given their geographical location? The sea is blocked by US ships, the land is blocked by rival countries as well. I do not get it.
The answer is, IMHO, obvious: smuggling. They've managed to smuggle immense volumes of missiles and UAVs from Iran over 8 years of blockade by the Saudi-led coalition, supported by USA and allies.
Why should this change now?
You mean small boats and vehicles + bribery?
But how can you bring ballistic missiles this way?
Small boats? I guess you can bribe bil boats as well? Or containers...
Not only small boats. Heck, at the height of the Saudi-led intervention, amid all the Western complaints about famine in Yemen - and thousands really starving to death - rich people in Sana'a had no problem to buy themselves everything, including ice cream imported from the UAE. It was 'just' very expensive.
...and certain parts of Yemen continued exporting food to Saudi Arabia and Oman. Indeed, because the air policing was targeting almost all the trucks and petrol stations between, for example, Sa'ada and Sana'a, it was easier to export food to Saudi Arabia, than to bring it from northern Yemen to Sana'a.
So, now that was 'just food'. And ice cream. You think that was all that was 'smuggled' around the country?
Oman is not exactly a rival country. And while the Eastern part of Yemen is nominally under Coalition control (whatever that means given how the coalition is often tearing itself appart), good luck effectively controlling this immense stretch of desertic area.
Smuggling through small boats is an other possibility. Funnily enough the Houthis control the larger part of the Western coast thanks to Western diplomatic effort which actively denied a Saudi coalition victory at Hodeida in 2018.
Finally, a big philosophy in Iranian involvement is to empower local actors and favourite local "DIY" manufacturing of crude but effective design. Thus reducing the amount of smuggled components to the strict necessity.
In this sense it is the polar opposite of Western States who like to sell their overpriced weapon systems to Gulf princes (especially fighter jets) yet deny them less shiny but key systems (for ex: everything you need to sustain a Western style air campaign) in order to keep full control of their "partner". It is almost a second nature leading to absurd situations such as when the US built from scratch the Afghan National Army (ANA) and made it incapable to carry on its own the very war the US ordered it to fight.
It`s impossible for the west to do something there diplomatically, they tried this for mouths. Obama non-involvement policy also failed. Russia, Iran and China don`t search for deescalation, that is the reason it will not stop. The only solution is use of force. Let`s hope this light jab will have enough impact to scare them and regulate the situation.
Mind letting me know about any kind of a serious diplomatic effort by the 'West' in regards of the Houthis?
I mean: I hope you have a good reason to say that the West 'tried there diplomatically, for months'.
....and Oblabla simply abandoned Syria to the IRGC - in order to gain fame for signing the JPCOA, and irrespectively of this opening the doors for the Russian military intervention in the country, and the flight of millions of Syrians (and thus the 'refugee crisis' in the EU).
....while 'the only solution is use of force'-strategy is pursued for 106 years (at least), with results as we can see them.
Ever thought about trying something different?
Look at what happened in Iran, Syria, and Afghanistan when they tried different approaches. Things might work if the other side cooperates, but if they don't, it can be seen as weakness. Obama aimed for a Palestinian state, and now things are even worse. Avoiding direct conflict with Iran led to problems. Maybe it's time to stick to the tried-and-true methods that worked for centuries instead of creating new strategies that don't. After all people thinking did not really involved.
What of that in Iran, Syria, or Afghanistan was 'diplomacy'?
And when did Obama aim for a Palestinian state?
....and there are only two reasons why the USA are avoiding a conflict with Iran: it's too big, and meanwhile has nukes.
....while the only 'tried-and-true' methods applied in the Middle East are always the same, and that yes, for centuries. They can all be sumarised with one word: violence.
People in those countries didn't need just talk, aid, or empty promises; they wanted someone to bring stability so they could live normal lives. Despite the West's ideals, Iran stepped in and achieved that, with all available methods. Even if Iran has nuclear capabilities, they wouldn't use them recklessly. The key is to make it clear that crossing certain lines won't go unchecked, targeting their weapon facilities, revealing vulnerabilities to their supporters, and acting before they do. Perception plays a crucial role in life.
Hi, Tom. This message is about the Ukraine war. Could you reveal your point of view in the next Q&A on the next problem? The spoke person of PSU Yuriy Ihnat insisted in his interview that VKS RF use KAB, also Genstab-U use this definition in its daily report. You said that the Russians have a small amount of KABs. Do they set up production KABs?
Thank you for the extended background to the conflict. It may be compressed, but its certainly more than most of the media here is reporting. Have to give credit to the National Broadcasting reporter (as main stream as it gets in Norway) who on prime time said that the Houties is an experienced and capable force who will not be intimidated or beaten back by such efforts. No background, but clear Message there: this will not Work.
Also interesting what you write about the Saudi backed invation. They obviously were smarter than I thought, well my prejudices stand corrected. Based on what you said the most logical step would be to get those forces fully back, accept Houti regime in Yemen and try to behave decent against them. But then we still have the Gaza conflict fanning this.
American bureaucrats: doing stuff for the sake of looking in control. Not a bright way to deal with groups like the Houthis. Or Taliban.
The more I review the intellectual underpinnings of "Western" foreign policy, the stupider the leaders of the silly fantasy look. Shamming, all of them.
And all this because no one will finally put a leash on Israel, another country run by corrupt cravens. As if Israel's best successes haven't always been a result of patient, quiet counterintelligence work instead of playing apartheid with the IDF.
Good analysis, dude, thanks.
Thank you for this article Tom. Alone that someone is writing about different schools of islam and not putting everything into one bucket (like Wahabism and Suffi into the Sunni pot) is putting more depth than any newspaper journalist will ever will. Furthermore describing the root of the problem back to the historical development and closing off why people are following the Houthi (well, nobody likes to get bombed) makes this the best piece I read about this conflict by a far distance.
Thank you for the great historical tour. It differs in a way that it takes a human nature as a base, and is unbiased in this regard.
Hi Tom, one quick question; was the comment about the Shia majority in Saudi Arabia a typo, or is Wikipedia wrong?
Genuine question! (I know you like to look a things through sarcastic glasses haha)
If I've written 'majority' - then it's a typo. The Shi'a in Saudi Arabia are a (sizeable) minority.
It says '(where, BTW, much of population is consisting of the Shi’a)', I've interpreted that as a majority or at the least 50/50... I now see I could've interpreted it better too :-) sorry!