After repeated Houthi attacks, Israel strikes Hodeidah Port, signalling a shift in its response strategy

In a bold move, Israel launched a significant retaliatory strike against the Houthi-controlled Hodeidah Port in Yemen on July 21, 2024. The Israeli Air Force (IAF) carried out the operation, flying a challenging 3,400 kilometres round trip over hostile territories to target the port, a strategic asset for the Houthis.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant publicly celebrated the successful mission. Netanyahu praised the operation’s execution, Ben-Gvir expressed his approval on social media, and Gallant highlighted the symbolic message the strike sent across the Middle East. Despite the political leaders’ public statements, the action itself spoke volumes about Israel’s new approach to Houthi aggression.

Since October 7, the Houthis have launched 200 attacks against Israel, including drone strikes and missile launches. Israel’s response on Saturday was the first significant countermeasure, highlighting a shift from restraint to decisive action. This change was prompted by a recent drone attack on Tel Aviv, which resulted in the death of 50-year-old Yevgeny Ferder.

The Israeli strike on Hodeidah aimed to demonstrate the cost of continued Houthi provocations. While it is uncertain if this will deter future attacks, the message to the Houthis and their Iranian backers is clear: Israel will respond forcefully to any threat.

The immediate impact of the strike was visible as flames and smoke rose from the targeted port. Despite this, the Houthis retaliated the following day by firing a ballistic missile towards Eilat, intercepted before reaching Israeli airspace. This exchange underscores the ongoing tension and the challenges in achieving lasting deterrence.

Israel’s leaders face criticism for the delayed response to Houthi aggression. Questions arise about why it took over nine months and multiple attacks before Israel decided to strike back decisively. The delay could be attributed to the country’s preoccupation with other security concerns or the escalation only after a fatality in Israel.

Historically, Israel has often responded to threats with verbal warnings and limited actions. However, the persistent rocket fire from Hezbollah in the North, despite numerous threats, shows that words alone are insufficient. Effective deterrence requires consistent and impactful actions.

The strike on Hodeidah marks a potential turning point in Israel’s defence policy. It signals a willingness to engage more directly with threats and underscores the importance of swift and decisive action in maintaining national security.

Analysis

Political

The attack on Hodeidah Port has significant political implications for Israel and the broader Middle East. Politically, the operation showcases Israel’s commitment to defending its sovereignty and deterring aggression. By launching a high-risk, long-distance strike, Israel sends a clear message to both its allies and adversaries that it will not tolerate attacks on its territory. This move could potentially alter the political dynamics in the region, influencing the behaviour of other hostile entities and shaping the responses of regional powers such as Iran, which supports the Houthis.

Domestically, the Israeli government’s public celebration of the strike may bolster its political standing, demonstrating strong leadership and decisive action. However, it could also provoke criticism for escalating tensions and risking further conflict. The political narrative surrounding the operation will likely influence public opinion and the government’s future defence strategies.

Social

Socially, the strike impacts Israeli society by reinforcing a sense of security and demonstrating the government’s commitment to protecting its citizens. The public statements by Israeli leaders aim to reassure the populace that their safety is a top priority. However, the celebration of military actions can also contribute to a culture of aggression and retaliation, potentially escalating cycles of violence.

For the Yemeni population, particularly in Hodeidah, the strike exacerbates the humanitarian crisis. The destruction of a strategic port affects the distribution of essential goods, worsening the living conditions for civilians. Socially, the conflict between Israel and the Houthis highlights the broader humanitarian issues in Yemen, drawing international attention to the plight of those affected by the ongoing war.

Racial

Racial dynamics play a significant role in the conflict, as the Houthi movement in Yemen is often associated with Shia Islam, while Israel is predominantly Jewish. The racial and religious identities involved can deepen divisions and fuel prejudices on both sides. The strike on Hodeidah may exacerbate existing tensions and contribute to a narrative of religious and racial conflict in the region. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for addressing the root causes of the conflict and promoting long-term peace and reconciliation.

Gender

Gender perspectives on the conflict reveal the often-overlooked impact of military actions on women and children. In both Israel and Yemen, women are disproportionately affected by violence and instability. The destruction of the Hodeidah Port, a vital lifeline for Yemeni civilians, can exacerbate the vulnerabilities of women, who are often responsible for securing food and resources for their families.

In Israel, the government’s strong military response is likely perceived differently across gender lines. Women may prioritize security but also advocate for diplomatic solutions to prevent further violence and protect future generations. Integrating gender perspectives into defence and foreign policy can help create more comprehensive and effective strategies for peace.

Economic

Economically, the strike on Hodeidah Port has significant ramifications. The port is a critical hub for Yemen, facilitating the import of goods and humanitarian aid. Its destruction disrupts the flow of essential supplies, exacerbating the economic crisis and humanitarian disaster in Yemen. For Israel, the cost of conducting long-range military operations is substantial, both financially and in terms of resource allocation. The strike signals a willingness to bear these costs for the sake of national security.

The broader economic impact includes potential fluctuations in regional trade and investment. The heightened tension can deter foreign investment and disrupt economic stability in the region. Israel’s economy, while resilient, could face challenges if the conflict escalates and necessitates prolonged military engagement.