The Arab Center in DC - Exactly a decade ago, Saudi Arabia announced the launch of a military intervention in Yemen, promising to lead a coalition of more than 10 nations—although some would later end their participation—against the Houthi armed group, officially known as Ansar Allah, that had taken over power from President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. Backed by the United States, Britain, and other Western states with arms and shared intelligence, on March 26, 2015, the Saudi coalition commenced airstrikes on Houthi-controlled areas, initiating a conflict that would drag on for years. Riyadh’s initial expectation of a swift, six-week military operation to defeat the Houthis became a prolonged and costly entanglement that has tested Saudi Arabia’s ability to impose its will on its neighbor and to force the Houthis to give up their control over a large part of Yemen.
Intervention Inception
Saudi Arabia’s rationale for intervention shifted over time as the conflict unfolded. At the outset, it cast the intervention as a direct response to President Hadi’s urgent appeal to the Gulf states and their international allies that he conveyed in a letter to the UN Security Council in March 2015. Hadi called for states “to provide immediate support in every form and take the necessary measures, including military intervention, to protect Yemen and its people from the ongoing Houthi aggression.” The Saudis initially conceived of the intervention as a decisive effort to reinstate Yemen’s legitimate government in the capital Sanaa. As the situation progressed, Saudi Arabia reframed its objective as restoring Yemen’s political process within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, which in 2011-2012 facilitated the transfer of power from former President Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi.
The core rationale behind Saudi Arabia’s intervention, however, stemmed from its perception of the Houthis as an Iranian proxy on the kingdom’s border. Riyadh feared that Iran’s influence through the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests. The kingdom saw the Houthi takeover of Sanaa not just as a challenge to Yemen’s stability but as a potential game changer in the broader Middle East power dynamics. In this context, Saudi Arabia framed its military intervention as a necessary response to protect its own security and regional influence.
But while Saudi Arabia believed Iran to be the principal force behind the Houthi takeover, the extent of Iranian influence over the group at the time was, in fact, relatively limited. Although the Houthis depended on Iranian military and logistical support, particularly for weaponry and strategic advice, they were not fully under Iran’s control. Iran, while capable of advising the Houthis on strategic and policy matters, lacked the leverage to dictate their actions. Rather, local factors such as longstanding tribal rivalries in Yemen, the Houthis’ longtime opposition to the central government, and their pursuit of greater political power, were more influential in shaping the Houthis’ behavior. The Houthi alliances with former President Saleh and certain factions of the Yemeni military also played a crucial role in the group’s rise. In other words, Iran’s influence was significant, but it was not all-encompassing, as the Houthis had their own political and strategic goals. Nonetheless, Riyadh persisted in portraying the Houthis as a tool of Iranian expansionism. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabia’s prolonged antagonism may have ultimately strengthened Iran’s influence, as it pushed the Houthi armed group to deepen its reliance on Iranian military and logistical support.
Successes and Failures
The Saudi-led intervention produced limited successes but was largely marked by strategic and operational failures. One notable achievement was the halting of the Houthi-Saleh alliance’s territorial expansion, particularly its advance into southern Yemen. By mid-2015, coalition-backed forces had managed to retake Aden and surrounding areas, reversing the Houthis’ gains in the south. Additionally, the coalition succeeded in 2016 in reclaiming Mukalla in the east after it had fallen under the control of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula for nearly a year.
Still, Saudi Arabia’s military campaign has largely failed to achieve its stated objectives, instead drawing global criticism for the immense toll that it has taken on civilian lives. The war has caused more than 375,000 deaths (most due to hunger resulting from the Saudi-led naval blockade) and the widespread destruction of Yemen’s infrastructure, exacerbating the country’s humanitarian crisis. Meanwhile, the Houthi movement has maintained its grip on Yemen’s northern highlands, home to a majority of the country’s population. At the same time, the current internationally recognized government, operating under the Presidential Leadership Council (PLC) headed by Mohammed al-Alimi, has struggled to assert its authority due to a combination of internal divisions, regional interventions, and the emergence of autonomous armed groups, operates primarily from its temporary capital in the south, Aden, while its members spend much of their time in exile in Riyadh, underscoring the Council’s political and military weaknesses.
Diverging agendas between allies also weakened the anti-Houthi coalition. In particular, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which other than Saudi Arabia was the actor most heavily invested in the conflict, often pursued divergent goals and tactics.
While Saudi Arabia primarily waged war on Yemen through airstrikes, financial and logistical support for anti-Houthi forces, and a comprehensive air, land, and sea blockade of Houthi-controlled areas, the UAE concentrated its efforts on southern and central Yemen. The UAE deployed ground troops and trained local Yemeni forces such as the Security Belt, the Elite Forces, and others, allowing it to exert indirect control over southern territories—an arrangement that former President Hadi once had likened to a sort of occupation. UAE’s proxy forces continue to control Yemen’s UNESCO-World-Heritage-Site Socotra island. Despite the UAE declaring in 2019 the withdrawal of its troops from Yemen, it continues to play a significant role. Crucially, Abu Dhabi’s hostility toward the Muslim Brotherhood led it to sideline Yemen’s Islamist Islah Party, instead aligning with the Southern Transitional Council (STC) and various Salafi militias. These alliances not only weakened the PLC but also contributed to the increasing fragmentation of Yemen, as areas nominally under government control are in fact under STC influence.
Whether or not the Saudi-led intervention was warranted, most assessments indicate that it lacked a legitimate foundation, as the conflict in Yemen originated as an internal struggle that should have been resolved by Yemenis themselves. The intervention internationalized the war, introducing power dynamics and external dependencies to Yemen that undermined prospects for a sustainable political settlement. By expanding and prolonging the conflict, the intervention eroded Yemen’s already weak sovereignty and deepened internal divisions, complicating efforts to restore national cohesion. Moreover, the intervention’s failure has weakened Saudi Arabia’s strategic position and strengthened the Houthis, allowing them to entrench their control over northern Yemen, to enhance their military capabilities, and to strength their political legitimacy. The prolonged military campaign has allowed the group to consolidate power, making a negotiated resolution increasingly difficult.
Saudi Arabia’s Strategic Recalibration
After several years of the intervention, Saudi Arabia’s approach in Yemen underwent a significant transformation due to a combination of pivotal events, including Saudi operatives’ 2018 murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the 2023 China-brokered agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran to restore diplomatic relations, and Israel’s war on Gaza.
The assassination of Washington Post columnist Khashoggi in Istanbul severely damaged Saudi Arabia’s international reputation, particularly in the West, and provoked heightened criticism of its policies, including the war in Yemen. Germany and Denmark imposed arms embargoes on Saudi Arabia, citing the Khashoggi murder and the Kingdom’s actions in Yemen as central reasons. Faced with growing domestic and international pressure, Riyadh had no choice but to recalibrate its approach toward the Yemen conflict, shifting from military intervention to diplomacy. A recognition that its aggressive foreign policy risked alienating critical allies, particularly the United States which was under mounting domestic political pressure to curb arms sales to the kingdom, motivated the change. In this context, Riyadh’s move was about preserving vital geopolitical relationships rather than rethinking its regional ambitions.
The March 2023 agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, brokered by China, heralded Riyadh’s strategic pivot from confrontation with the Islamic Republic to containment. In the deal, Iran agreed to significantly reduce its support for the Houthis. For Riyadh, its priorities evolved, as the political costs of the war began to outweigh its strategic benefits, prompting a shift toward de-escalation. This led to an unprecedented visit in April 2023 by the kingdom’s ambassador to Sanaa, Mohammed al-Jaber—who had been recalled from the Yemeni capital years earlier—where he met with Houthi leaders. With the Saudi leadership now focused on domestic economic transformation under Vision 2030, the political cost of the war outweighed its potential strategic gains, pushing Riyadh to seek an exit rather than a military victory.
The Gaza war that began in October 2023 led Saudi Arabia to further recalibrate its calculus in Yemen, compelling Riyadh to avoid actions that might provoke retaliation from the Houthis. Saudi Arabia’s non-participation in Operation Prosperity Guardian—the US-led military campaign to safeguard the maritime trade routes in the southern Red Sea from Houthi attacks—along with its hesitancy toward US-UK military strikes on Houthi positions, underlines a broader shift. Riyadh no longer sees Yemen as a strategic battleground for confrontation. Instead, its primary concern now is de-escalation, fearing that renewed hostilities could undo its diplomatic progress with Iran and jeopardize its domestic and regional ambitions.
Yemen’s Complex Landscape
Over the past decade, Yemen’s political landscape has become more complex, marked by fragmentation, a persistent political deadlock, and a worsening humanitarian crisis. Initially a domestic player in Yemen’s internal power struggles, the Houthis have become a regional actor, evident in their strikes on Red Sea shipping, US warships, and Israeli targets in solidarity with Gaza. Today, with Iran’s regional influence waning, the Houthis are diversifying their alliances, courting support from Iraq, Russia, and even al-Shabaab in Somalia.
The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement has led to reduced Iranian oversight over the Houthis and led the group to become more autonomous, with more independent military capabilities. A 2024 report from the United Nations Panel of Experts on Yemen describes the Houthis’ efforts to cultivate a direct network of allies, bypassing Iran’s traditional intermediary role. Saudi Arabia’s greater flexibility in its dealings with the Houthis, driven by the rapprochement, has helped the Houthis to consolidate power.
As the Houthis have strengthened their position, the evolving dynamics on the ground have influenced broader regional and international strategies. The latest US airstrikes in Yemen mark a more aggressive American military strategy by directly targeting Houthi leaders rather than only their military assets. In addition, in contrast to the Biden administration’s generally more private pressure on Iran to stop supporting the Houthis, President Donald Trump has publicly and directly linked Iran to the actions of Yemen’s Houthi rebels, stating that “every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon… as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of Iran, and Iran will be held responsible.” This attribution may serve as a strategic pretext for American escalation against Tehran.
Yet the Houthis’ deeply entrenched military position, combined with Yemen’s challenging geography, diminishes the likelihood of Trump’s new campaign achieving a decisive military outcome. To address the growing Houthi threat most effectively, a comprehensive approach is required. Strengthening Yemen’s internationally recognized government and unifying its factions is crucial to offering a viable alternative to exclusive Houthi control. By consolidating political authority and addressing the underlying causes of the conflict, Yemen can present a united front and reduce Houthi influence.
________________________________________
This policy analysis was first written for and published in the website of the Arab Center in DC.
