Is striking fixed ground targets strategically effective? That's the question that underpins the debate as to whether the intense bombing carried out by US warplanes is what prompted the Iran-backed Houthis, terrorist rebels in Yemen, to agree to stop attacking commercial and military naval vessels in the Red Sea.
Houthis Meet Trump
The Biden administration’s tit-for-tat, piecemeal air attacks on a limited number of the Houthis’ missile warehouses, launch sites, and radar installations are distinctly different from the Trump defense team’s unleashing of 1,000 bombing sorties in less than two months. In a press release from the White House, President Trump's intentions regarding the Houthis were made clear.
"It has been over a year since a US-flagged commercial ship safely sailed through the Suez Canal, the Red Sea, or the Gulf of Aden. No terrorist force will stop American commercial and naval vessels from freely sailing the Waterways of the World. Our economic and national security have been under attack by the Houthis for too long. Today, President Trump's action and leadership are moving to end this."
For the current US chief executive, "moving to end this" meant a full-on bombing campaign from March 15 to May 6. In an April 27 post on X, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) explained that its concentrated air attacks were launched from the two Carrier Strike Groups: the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group and the Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group. During the air campaign named Operation Rough Rider, strike aircraft from the two carriers hit more than 800 targets (later revised to 1000 targets in 45 days), destroying command-and-control facilities, air defense systems, advanced weapons manufacturing plants, weapons warehouses, and underground bunker complexes. These warehousing locations contained conventional weaponry, including unmanned aerial systems and uncrewed surface vessels. Additionally, USCENTCOM explained US strike forces have "killed hundreds of Houthi fighters and numerous Houthi leaders, including senior Houthi missile and UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) officials.”
Touting the resolve of the Trump administration to make commercial ocean transportation safe again, "Sebastian Gorka, President Trump's senior director for counterterrorism, says the administration's leadership is making it 'impossible' for the Iran-backed Houthi rebels to attack US vessels in the Red Sea," Just the News reported. Lauding the Trump defense team, JTN explained: "'Thanks to [Defense Secretary] Pete Hegseth and amazing American war fighters, we are making it impossible for the Houthis to attack US vessels or the vessels of any decent nation, so that we can have freedom of navigation on the high seas,' Gorka said [on Apr. 26]."
During his Oval Office press availability with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, President Trump's take was simply: "They have announced that they are not, announced to us, at least, that they don't want to fight any more. They just don't want to fight, and we will honor that … They have capitulated. But more importantly, we will take their word. They say they will not be blowing up ships anymore." Consequently, the US Navy has stopped the daily bombing sorties on the Iran-supported Houthis.
Sanctions on Iran Contributed
Middle East experts also credit the Trump administration's decisive actions against Iran. According to USCENTCOM X postings, the US Treasury has applied sanctions on "entities and individuals supporting Iran's Ballistic Missile Program. … [And the] US is sanctioning vessels that deliver oil derivatives to Iran-backed Houthi terrorists." Reinforcing the impact the sanctions were having in addition to the intense air attacks on the Houthis, Nadwa Al-Dawsari, nonresident scholar at the Middle East Institute and a fellow at the Center on Armed Groups, told the US Naval Institute News, "[T]he most likely scenario is that Iran told the Houthis to stop following threats from Trump and Hegseth. While the Houthis might stop attacking ships, they will likely 'regroup and recalibrate. … All that pressure on Tehran paid off, but for how long?'"
The downside of the Houthis pausing their attacks on Red Sea shipping and US warships is that, as Al-Dawsari explained in an X post, "Iran & the #Houthis just need to weather the storm, restock weapons, deepen ties with AL Qaeda, expand influence in East Africa, & prepare for the next round." However, for now, the intense bombing can be said to have contributed to the Iran-backed terrorists agreeing to negotiate a halt to their missile and drone attacks. Nonetheless, the Houthis have been quick to point out that the agreement is with the US and will not impact the continued assaults on Israel, which can mete out its own retribution on the Houthis, as it has amply demonstrated.
So, whether you subscribe to the efficacy of bombing to achieve strategic objectives or not, the undeniable fact is that before Trump's intense bombing campaign, the Houthis attacked US warships 174 times in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. The bombing destroyed 80% of its missile and drone attack capability, and the Houthis called it quits. If they regroup, rearm, and start again, they know the consequences.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
