Although US President Donald Trump did not focus in his campaign on Yemen, only some of the statements made by him about the war led by Saudi Arabia against the Houthis in Yemen, and in which he stressed that his country will not be far from the conflict in it , as it does not represent a direct threat to the US national security. Since the policy and interests are shifting sands that do not know fortitude , analysts in the US foreign policy have reached to the conclusion: that the war in Yemen will be at stake and the real test for the management of US President-elect Donald Trump, despite the importance and seriousness of other conflicts in the region, such as the war in Iraq, Syria and Libya, the war in Yemen will provide an opportunity to capture a clear vision of US foreign policy in the next four years, and it is another opportunity to explore the identity of the advisory groups that the new American president will listen to it, will he tend, for example, to a pragmatic movement, which was represented in the US administration by the former adviser to US national security, Mike Flynn, a current focus on the fight against Islamic extremist groups or Trump will lean more to the neo-conservatives-such as former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton- who see Iran’s influence in a major threat to regional stability?
Since receipt of Donald Trump office on January 20 this year, the US administration has stepped up its strikes against al-Qaeda in Yemen, where it launched last week alone 40 raid, at least against the sites in Abyan and Shabwa in the south and the province of al-Beidha in the middle, into a critical military confrontation looked at ostensibly aimed at al-Qaida and the organization Daesh, while targeting in its essence also the Iranian regime, which the presence in Yemen is based on chaos in the country. It worth noting that the decision to increase the number of US troops and military strikes in Yemen was the first one among decisions taken by the US president, Donald Trump immediately upon taking office . consequently that the US forces announced an open war on the organization, which had not caught his breath after the blows of the Arab coalition and Yemeni forces, until the recent military developments have come to put him in a hysterical state.
The Donald Trump administration’s response to the war in Yemen, from the point view of political analysts will tell a lot about the path of foreign policy of US President-elect in the coming years , according to the conclusions of experts in the United States, the Trump would be forced to take a critical stance toward divergent views around him noting that he is facing a choice to continue to support Saudi Arabia in trying to stop Iranian influence in Yemen and the Levant, or to take measures that will focus on the fight against militant groups and, in any case, the Trump should end the war there and show the kind of capacity and leadership to tackle the conflicts that require realistic accounts and balanced replies. So Yemen will be Donald Trump’s arena to fight terrorism and counter Iran’s influence in it.
And in line with this analytical vision , research political groups went by saying that President Donald Trump administration began to escalate action against «rebels» militias backed by the Iranian regime in Yemen, as part of a broader plan to counter it by targeting its allies. To this purpose , the United States sent the USS «Cool» off the coast of Yemen to protect freedom of navigation in the Strait of Bab el-Mandeb, because the expansion of the Houthis and the extension of their presence in the west near the Strait of Bab el Mandeb, which is the gateway to the Red Sea, represents a potential threat to about 8% of world trade that pass through the Suez Canal, which connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. ” According to this analytical vision , the President, Donald Trump administration may be engaged in direct form in fighting rebels along the Saudi and Emirati allies and do a very strong action against the Iranian regime in Yemen, noting that policy of Trump is an explicit extension of Western policy, which sees in Yemen as a natural influence square of the Kingdom Saudi Arabia, which is necessary to maintain the balance of the current regional conflict in order to serve foreign interests in the region, especially since Russia seems not reluctance and has no interests to mention in Yemen which is different from the situation in Syria.
These analyzes are also of the opinion that Donald Trump’s aides see in Yemen important arena to demonstrate US resolve in the face of the Iranian regime, and to change what they consider to be the Obama administration’s failure to respond to the growing Iranian power in the Levant. The difference between the American react during the Obama administration and the current administration is obvious . When two failed attempts to target the US Americans destroyer, the Americans were satisfied with only simple military operation, which hit the radar, after the second target and without any media noise. Now, with the “successful” targeting the frigate of Saudi Arabia, a strongly-worded statements have been issued from the Pentagon to the Iranian regime and the rebels, this process is considered dangerous to the region because they are targeting ships in the overcrowded sea area , adding that the aim of which may be an American ships.
It was the former former US President Barack Obama’s policy tends to support the “alliance” with a feeling embarrassed by the human cost of the fighting in Yemen. But this feeling faded with the new administration, which is dominated by relevant figures of previous experience in oil companies such as Foreign Minister, who was working at ExxonMobil and was director of the company in Yemen at the beginning of the nineties of the last century. In addition to big business interests that bind Donald Trump with some Gulf businessmen , which may explain the escalating role of the UAE, in Yemen, and the participation of its troops in the recent US air drops, as well as the wide participation of its troops and its southern allies of the ongoing fighting operations in Tihama plain.
Following Donald Trump win the presidency, Mark Rifkin and Ahmed M’hidi wrote, in the US, “International Affairs” magazine, that “jihadists are pleasant to assume Trump presidency, as they believe he will lead the United States to path of the destruction itself,” but the news coming from Yemen do not carry good news for the extremist organizations. A report by the Security Council disclosed that the Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula throughout 2016 was exposed to more than 30 US drone aircraft strike caused the deaths of 139 people. And it nominates that losses in the ranks of al-Qaeda will rise after Washington deployed small groups on the ground to assist in military operations that target the organization. Yemen seems ideal for the implementation of Trump pledges to achieve victory on the three main risks in his agenda: Daesh and al-Qaeda and the Iranian regime.
Motives of Trump to start from Yemen in the face of the Iranian regime may be multiple, most notably that the confrontation in Yemen will be for the US administration a less complicated than face them in Iraq or Syria, where players are numerous and frequently interests are conflicting or interfere. Yemen is a Square on which the review of its strength against the Iranian regime is easy which will not lose anything real with a loss of Yemen, as well as any direct US military intervention against rebels easily marketed to the media and the public of Trump as a process of fighting against the Iranian regime, which gives an indication that Trump is true to his words in his campaign promises to break its strength , and he did not escalate against it rhetorically only. While the state of regional sectarian conflict will continue to be the cycle without end, destroying more than one country in the region. And perhaps in others after that. There are fears that harsh approach to the Yemeni situation leading to the Iranian response against the United States in Iraq and Syria. Or even to engage in all-out war with the Iranian regime.
Unit Gulf Studies
Translated by Mudhaffar al-Kusairi
Rawabet Center for Research and Strategic Studies