Houthis and Iran: A War Time Alliance
2023, in ISPI Dossier, "The Iranian Constellation: Reassessing the Power of Militias in the Middle East", Italian Institute for International Political Studies, edited by E. Ardemagni
https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2021.1954353?TAB=PERMISSIONS&SCROLL…
4 pages
1 file
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
Abstract
After eight years of conflict, the Houthis are now militarily closer to Iran. They are also more integrated than before in the pro-Iranian armed network. However, the Houthis differ from Iran’s proxies in the region, and not only for being part of the Zaydi Shia doctrine. The Yemeni armed movement is economically autonomous from Tehran, with its own political agenda and a distinct, elite-driven structure of power. This means that the increasing alliance between the Houthis and Iran, strengthened by the 2015 conflict, has never really been tested during peacetimes, but only in times of uprising and war. The question is to what extent the Houthis are able to exercise their agency in Yemeni politics –so hypothetically diverging from Iran’s expectations- as talks with Saudi Arabia are still ongoing and the Saudi-Iranian diplomatic agreement was inked.
Key takeaways
AI
AI
- The Houthis have evolved into a sophisticated armed force, integrating into Iran's military network.
- Their relationship with Iran is pragmatic, marked by financial autonomy and local political agendas.
- The Jihad Council centralizes Houthi military strategy while integrating Iranian and Hezbollah advice.
- Hezbollah serves as a mentor for the Houthis, enhancing their military capabilities through training.
- The alliance between Houthis and Iran is primarily wartime-focused, raising questions for future peacetime relations.
Related papers
Digest of Middle East Studies, 2016
This article examines the role of Iran in Yemen within the context of Arab-Iranian relations. It also examines the debate on the involvement of Iran in the ongoing political developments in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. The article focuses on the Houthi Movement in Yemen, its origin, growth and political expansion. It also investigates its relations with Iran and its allies in the region, and discusses other factors that strengthened its political image in Yemen. The article also provides an early assessment of the implication of the Decisive Storm military led by Saudi Arabia.
Theme: The political transition in Yemen has entered a critical stage after the Houthi movement's takeover of Sana'a and President Hadi's flight to Aden. The polarisation of the political forces reflects the growing tensions in the region and could end in an open military conflict.
Arab Reform Initiative , 2016
This paper discusses the Houthi- Saleh alliance, its reasons and future.
MES Insights, 2017
As Yemen's internal war continues to drag on with no end in sight, there is increased risk of miscalculations that may lead to further escalation and internationalization of the conflict. Increased regional and international geopolitical competition, continued efforts to combat the threat of international terrorism and Islamic extremism emanating from the region, and maritime security concerns that threaten the global economy and freedom of navigation have only increased Yemen's strategic importance to the national security agendas of regional and international actors alike. 1 Such considerations have not been lost on Yemen's domestic incumbent and insurgent elites, contributing, in part, to political and military strategies that seek to manage but not entirely eliminate internal security threats that pose challenges to the national security interests of regional and international actors. As such, Houthi expansionism and the ongoing internal war may be better understood in the context of the development of a domestic elite strategic culture that has contributed to perpetual insecurity and internal war in Yemen. Strategic culture can be described as traditional practices and habits of thought by which military force is organized and employed by a society in the service of its political goals. When viewed through the lens of strategic culture, Houthi expansionism, and internal war in Yemen generally, should not be viewed as an aberration that seeks to change the status quo. Rather, it should be considered a continuation of established political norms and military-decision making institutionalized under the regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh, which seeks to balance a host of internal and external actors and potential threats within an environment dominated by elite competition and internal factionalization, in the absence of effective state institutions and a clear monopoly on the use of violence by the state. Such a governing strategy has contributed to the proliferation of militias and other irregular and non-state forces, military factionalization, and increasingly the formation of civil-military relations akin to warlordism, in which military and/or tribal elites exercise civil power at a local or regional level through their influence and control of militias. 2 Within this domestic environment, the military has played a central role in linking a number of disparate groups to the regime, while at the same time factionalization has allowed for effective divide and rule tactics to shield the regime from reprisal. Furthermore, the dependence of the Yemeni economy on a combination of oil revenues, remittances, and, increasingly, foreign aid has left the Yemeni government vulnerable to external market forces and shocks associated with geopolitical competition. Within this geopolitical setting, internal war and perpetual insecurity threatening regional and international interests have supported a growing war economy and helped to prop up the armed forces as a central player in patronage politics and the economy writ large through its role in the tribal-military-commercial complex and the Yemen Economic Corporation (YECO)—formerly the Military Economic Corporation or MECO—, which has its hands in nearly all facets of the Yemeni economy and serves as a conduit for foreign aid. 3 ............(Read on)..............
The paper refers to three phases experienced by the group in relation to the agreements. During these phase, it changed its behavior towards those agreements. The first phase dates back to the six wars, when the Houthis used multiple tactics to adapt to the transformation that the group was experiencing due to preparations for a new leadership. The Houthis also exploited the agreements in order to survive the attacks of the army and the tribes loyal to it, and to secure sources of arms supplies. The Houthis used the fragile political situation and the conflicts between the opposition and the authorities as a means to perpetuate their existence as a rebel group under pressure. During that phase, the Houthis exploited the discontents of the local population against the authorities to recruit more fighters. Houthis also used the agreements at that stage to build barricades, dig trenches, and recruit more fighters from other provinces. Naturally, signs of rebellion surfaced in areas near Sana'a. Then, the Houthis attacked Saudi Arabia in order to assure the Iranians that they were confronting their regional opponent, and to secure the sympathy of the local population by conveying the feeling that they were under attack! During the second phase (2011-2014), the group used various tactics ranging from signing "non-aggression" agreements with the tribes, especially before the fall of Sana'a, to isolating the powerful tribes as an initial step before striking them hard when they could receive no help from other tribes. This stage also shows the Houthi exploitation of the events of 2011 to control and isolate Saada. During the next two years, the Houthi group secured the flow of weapons from Midi port in Hajjah to Saada, and took advantage of the democratic openness during that period to recruit, presenting itself as a victim of the regime. It also manipulated the events to obtain weapons from Iran. During that time, the government seized the ship Jihan 1, which was on its way from Iran to the Houthis. This stage was characterized by the Houthis' elusiveness, and their failure to refer to the main goals. The group repeatedly stressed that its goal was not authority, the government, the state, or the tribe. It gradually modified its goals. It began its attack under the pretext that they were only confronting foreign Salafis in Dammaj, then the tribes that threatened them. The next target was "Al-Ahmar family" rather than Hashid tribe. In their attack to take over Amran Governorate, the Houthi stated that their goal was to change of the governor and the leadership of the 310th Armored Brigade and not the Yemeni Islah Party or the tribes of Amran.