The Yemeni army’s seizure of the port of Mokha carries implications that extend beyond its immediate military value, sending political messages with regional and potentially international consequences.
From the perspective of the battlefield, the operation once again demonstrated the inability of the Saudi-led coalition to achieve a significant military victory. It also suggested that the Yemeni army, in its various components, does not regard internal Yemeni fighting as a solution to the crisis facing the country.
One indication was the rapid surrender of hundreds of Yemeni soldiers fighting alongside the coalition without a major battle, followed by the response of the Yemeni army and Ansar Allah, which did not take retaliatory measures against those who surrendered.
Against this backdrop, Saudi Arabia continues to rely on air strikes that have killed Yemeni civilians, leaving aerial bombardment as the principal means through which it wages the war.
Mokha and the Wider Regional Confrontation
The significance of the Yemeni advance goes beyond control of Mokha, a port positioned at the entrance to the Red Sea, and the possibility of extending control over the islands opposite it.
Across the region, the United States is imposing a tight naval blockade on Iranian ports in an effort to intensify economic pressure on the government and potentially transform that pressure into domestic unrest capable of threatening the country’s internal stability.
The Yemeni development therefore falls within the broader confrontation with the US-Israeli alliance.
Yemen’s position within the Axis of Resistance has already been demonstrated through its support for the resistance in Gaza and Lebanon. This raises the possibility that Sanaa could use its newly strengthened military position to support Iran’s war effort if circumstances require it.
At the same time, news agencies quoted a US official as saying Tehran was considering a “major escalation” and might not limit itself to targeting Gulf states as it had in recent weeks.
The Wall Street Journal, citing American and Middle Eastern officials, also reported that Iran had resumed ballistic missile production at underground facilities using components already in its possession.
US military and intelligence circles do not rule out the possibility that Iran could launch a major missile attack before the US midterm elections in November. Such an attack, according to these assessments, could go beyond striking American bases in the region and reach deep into the occupied Palestinian territories.
The Wall Street Journal also reported that a White House meeting involving military and security advisers, the vice president and the secretary of state concluded that Iran may be capable of holding out until the end of Trump’s presidency and the inauguration of his successor.
The Battle Over Bab al-Mandab and Hormuz
The Saudi escalation in Yemen came, according to this analysis, on American instructions and was intended to remove control over the Bab al-Mandab Strait from the hands of the Axis of Resistance as Washington escalated its war against Iran.
Such an outcome would have helped ensure that the Strait of Hormuz remained at least partially open.
If successful, the strategy could also have given Republicans an image of military victory at a time when they badly need one to preserve their majority in the US House of Representatives.
What American strategists behind the plan failed to account for, however, is that the Iranian and Yemeni forces are not fighting to secure electoral gains and are not fighting other countries’ wars.
The military doctrine of the Axis of Resistance is built around national dignity, full independence and opposition to imperialism and its projects. Within this framework, sacrifice and endurance, rather than short-term calculations of political profit and loss, sit at the centre of its approach to war.
Trump Turns to Domestic Promises
Trump has not directly acknowledged defeat, but he has been unable to conceal his frustration with the outcome of the confrontation.
Addressing the Republican National Committee, he pledged to provide US$5,000 to every American adult if Republicans win the midterm elections, on the condition that the money, which he called “Trump distributions”, be spent inside the United States.
Republican leaders claim the proposal is unrelated to what critics describe as the disastrous consequences of US foreign policy, pointing out that Trump had previously promised Americans US$2,000 from tariff revenues.
That earlier pledge, however, was never implemented, and the new proposal may face the same fate. Its estimated cost is US$1.2 trillion.
A Strategic Trap for Trump
Trump and the Republican Party now appear to be facing an increasingly difficult strategic position.
On one side, launching a broad attack on Iran carries the risk of both the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab being closed, potentially triggering a severe global economic crisis.
There is also the possibility that Yemen could strike Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti, the largest US military base on the African continent, alongside another American base in Kenya and an Israeli military facility in Ethiopia identified as the Dahlak Island base.
On the other side, the United States cannot easily become directly involved in a war against Yemen before the midterm elections.
Such a conflict could revive among American voters memories of what the analysis describes as the disastrous results of the war against Iran, potentially turning the possibility of a Republican electoral defeat into a near certainty and perhaps a severe one.
Trump has therefore fallen into a strategic trap of his own making.
With each passing day, his political fate is becoming more closely tied to the outcome of the wars the United States is fighting in the region. At the same time, the political weight of the Axis of Resistance is increasing as a direct consequence of the results it is achieving on the battlefield.
