US acts unilaterally as Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping exposes UNSC inaction

United Nations, Jan 14 (IANS) The attacks on ships in the Red Sea region by Houthi rebels are acknowledged by all members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) as a danger to food security and the international economy, yet as usual, it is unable to act beyond grudgingly adopting a resolution condemning them.

But in this conflict, the US, as it has often done, has cobbled together an international coalition to take unilateral action, clobbering the Houthi-held areas of Yemen.

The Houthi militia have been attacking civilian ships in the Red Sea region, a vital link connecting Asia and East Africa with the Middle East and Europe and beyond through the Suez Canal.

In this muddled scenario, they assert that they want to disrupt shipping in support of the people of Gaza under Israel’s massive retaliation for the October 7, 2023 terrorist strike by Hamas.

Their attempts to choke the mouth of the Red Sea have reverberations across the world and risk regional escalation.

Reflecting the universal sentiments, Ecuador’s Deputy Permanent Representative Andrés Efren Montalvo Sosa told the Council on Friday that the attacks on the ships have “impacts on a global scale on regional supply chains and increases in the prices of goods”.

The US and China, at loggerheads on many issues, agreed with that assessment at the meeting hastily convened at Russia’s request to draw attention to a spate of bombings of targets in the Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen, some of them civilian, by a US-led coalition made up of Western countries and Bahrain.

China’s Permanent Representative Zhang Jun said the Houthi campaign against shipping “interrupts and disrupts international trade order”.

And Beijing has a lot riding on it as the world's biggest exporter.

US Permanent Representative Linda Thomas-Greenfield said: “No one – no one – in this room is immune from the effects of these attacks. Not even Russia”, she said, adding, “So long as any one of our ships are vulnerable, all of our ships are vulnerable.”

And on Thursday, speaking in support of a resolution presented by the US, she called attacks “an economic threat, increasing the prices people pay for food, medicine, and energy”.

Agreeing about the threat is the easy part, but doing something about is not just hard, but impossible given the global polarisation and the veto powers in the Security Council.

The Council managed to pass the resolution on Thursday condemning the attacks demanding they stop only because Russia sensing the international mood abstained, rather than veto it.

In the absence of Council action or a mandate for action, the US and its allies have unilaterally launched “Operation Prosperity Guardian” against the Houthi-held areas.

Assistant Secretary-General Khaled Khiari said the escalated counter-attacks on Thursday comprised “reportedly conducted over 50 air and missile strikes on targets across Yemen on 11 January, including in Sanaa, Taiz, Hudaydah, Hajja, Sa’ada, Dhamar and Ibb”.

While he did not say if any of the targets were civilian, Russia’s Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia asserted that they included ports and airports.

Thomas-Greenfield said that US and its allies were attacking Houthi targets under the UN Charter’s Article 51 which allows nations to take action on their own or collectively for self-defence against armed attacks.

Russia and China, among others, maintain attacks on ships on international waters are not attacks on on countries that allow the self-defence that the US claims.

Nebenzia said the coalition’s action was, therefore, a violation of Yemen’s sovereignty and in contravention of international law.

Regardless of the legal quibbling, the US and its allies will continue to take action against the Houthis and the Council cannot do anything even if they violated international law.

This is the second such crisis facing the world in recent years; the other is Russia’s war on Ukraine that disrupted shipping in the Black Sea, putting at risk the supply of foodgrains and fertilisers to many countries around the world and raising the spectre of famine in some places.

The UN had a partial, short-lived success when it developed the Black Sea Grain Initiative that allowed ships to travel from Ukrainian ports carrying food without threat of attacks from Russia and with Turkey’s monitoring.

After a run of about a year with hiccups, it ended in July last year when Russia would renew it.

Something similar will not be possible in the Red Sea even on a short-term basis because the conflicts are chaotic without a definitive nation state facing off another, and only a militia collection looking for attention by using a cause now in global focus.

The Houthi provocation has a parallel to the Hamas terror strike on Israel.

The Hamas tactic was to get Israel to mount a massive retaliation that would rebound on it through the appalling images of its victims drawing sympathy around the world.

That has happened, even in the US and among sections of the Democratic Party that condemned Israel’s retaliatory actions in Gaza, and echoing in the chambers of the International Court of Justice where South Africa has brought accusations of “genocide”.

The US coalition’s retaliation against the Houthis, even though more precise in hitting targets with military potential, is likely to whip up sympathy for the Houthis, especially when they try to link themselves to the Palestinians for Gaza.

The other aim of the Houthis would be to draw Iran into the conflict, even if Tehran wants to stay away – as seems likely now from how it has been lying low – regardless of the price either would pay.

The US has trained its sights on Iran, blaming it for the actions of its fellow Shia Houthis.

Thomas-Greenfield said: “We need to also be clear about the role of Iran in these attacks. Without Iranian support – in violation of their obligations under Resolution 2216 – the Houthis would struggle to effectively track and strike commercial vessels navigating shipping lanes through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden."

That resolution adopted in 2015 imposed an arms embargo on Yemen and prohibited giving them military support.

“Every member of this Council – and especially those with direct channels to Iran – should press Iran’s leaders to rein in the Houthis and stop these attacks,” she said.

Moscow’s interventions at the Council have two aims: Embarrass the West by using the Red Sea crisis to draw attention to the Gaza situation, and protecting Iran.