Lenderking Blames Houthis and Iran for Red Sea ‘Militarization’

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the US envoy to Yemen calls for an “immediate end” to “terrorism” against ships

US Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
US Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT

Lenderking Blames Houthis and Iran for Red Sea ‘Militarization’

US Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
US Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Both Iran and the Houthis should be blamed for the “militarization of the Red Sea,” said Tim Lenderking, the US special envoy to Yemen, stressing that the military action undertaken by the United States and its allies is "against the Houthi military capability.” Lenderking said the Houthis are acting "like a global terrorist organization,” calling on them to “stop their attacks immediately.”

Lenderking was talking in an exclusive interview with Asharq Al-Awsat on the eve of his new tour in the region, said the situation in Red Sea “has become unbearable.” However, he left the door open to different measures, adding: “When their attacks stop, we can stop too.” He believed that this Houthi behavior “contradicts support for the Palestinians.” Pointing out that their behavior is endangering the “tremendous progress” achieved in the “peace process” led by the United Nations.

Lenderking stressed that “Iran poses a major threat,” describing supplying the Houthis with money and weapons to attack ships as “very convenient for Iran’s agenda,” which is acting to “destabilize,” and not “the behavior of a member of the international community.”  

- First. Now with this attack on the US Post in Jordan, it's not within your scope, but apparently, Iran is behind those attacks in Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. This is your area, and there is the huge problem in the Red Sea. How is the US going to deal with this issue?  

You’re absolutely right to point out the central role that Iran plays in destabilizing activity all over the region. This is nothing new. This is a feature of Iran's regional behavior since 1979. Instead of seeking constructive diplomatic solutions to the conflicts plaguing the region, Tehran has instead, time and time again, sought to destabilize it. If Iran were truly interested in peace in the region, they would cease their arming and financing of the Houthis and other destabilizing groups.  Instead, we only see that support continuing, as evidenced by the recent interdiction of a shipment of weapons from Iran to Yemen.  

This attack last week is just another example. This one is particularly egregious because it killed three US service members. What we see on the Yemen front is the Iranians playing a very active role in facilitating and assisting the Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea. This is a very unfortunate posture for the Iranians and the Houthis to take. What has this this led to? The militarization of the Red Sea. Something no country, including Iran, supposedly wanted up to this point. There are now more warships and more other ships protecting international commerce than there were before.  

The Houthis are driving up prices through attacks on international shipping. That means an increase in the prices of wheat and other goods getting to the Palestinian people or to other parts of Africa, Europe, and Asia. It's driving up fuel prices. It's adding on 5,000 miles, as shippers say they don't want anything to do with the Red Sea. They are having to go around the southern tip of Africa. How many tons of food are going to be spoiled by this additional long traverse? And how much higher will food prices go? This is hitting ordinary consumers. It's not just hitting the Israelis. It's not just hitting the Americans. It's hitting ordinary consumers around the world in every country, including Yemen, and the Palestinians as well.  

So, I would argue that the Houthi attacks must stop because they are inflicting damage on the global community and on Yemen. And that's why we think that the Houthi attacks are misguided. They're reckless. They’re indiscriminate, and that's why they should stop.  

- They say they are outraged by the Israeli attacks on the Palestinian civilians as you’ve just mentioned, and if the US pressure Israel, then everything will stop, not only within the Red Sea context, but also in the wider context. Iran is using this argument all the time. Again, they have the same the Axis of Resistance. They have the same argument, why doesn't the US listen to this?  

What the Houthis are doing is an example of someone having a problem with their neighbor and burning down the neighborhood grocery store. They're harming their neighbors and themselves and not actually addressing the core issue. This is why 24 countries signed a statement last week supporting military action to deter and degrade Houthi attacks. And this military action is not against Yemen, or against Yemenis. It is against the Houthi military capability which they are using to attack civilian shipping.  

So, we've been very clear about what the scope of these military strikes is. Similarly, the Houthis are behaving like a terrorist organization; attacking civilians, attacking civilian shipping, attacking innocent mariners, detaining them, threatening to hijack ships, not releasing the crew of the Galaxy Leader, 25 people from five different countries.  

We now have announced a designation of the Houthis as a specially designated global terrorist group, which will go into effect on February 16. This is the kind of response that the Houthis are generating. They're alienating the world community, and doing nothing to help the Palestinians, and putting the peace process in Yemen - which parties have painstakingly negotiated over the last two years, including the Houthis - in jeopardy. The Houthi behavior is misguided, and they should stop their attacks on shipping immediately.  

- And at the same time, what's going on probably, as you’ve just mentioned also, that this is affecting the peace process within the Yemeni parties, and then probably your support is also getting compromised. Is that the case?  

Our support for the peace process remains unshakable. I don't think that the peace effort in Yemen would be as far along had it not been for US support, and the commitment of this administration, and the priority that the President places on peace in Yemen through a Yemeni - Yemeni political negotiation and a durable ceasefire. Those remain US goals, and this is very much what we want to return to.  

But unfortunately, much of the progress that has been made over the last two years, which has created a truce in Yemen, which is still holding, is being jeopardized by the militarization of the Red Sea, which is caused by the Houthi attacks, and the threats that they are posing to shipping and to the civilian population. Absent political settlement, the humanitarian and economic crises will continue to get worse.   

The designation is a direct response to Houthi attacks on shipping. If there are no Houthi attacks on shipping, there is no need to designate them as a terrorist organization. If there are no Houthi attacks on shipping, there is no need for a growing coalition of countries to strike and degrade their military capability to protect international shipping.

- You’re talking about Operation Prosperity Guardian…  

Prosperity Guardian is another action that the Houthi attacks have generated – a large international response, defensive in nature, solely to protect crews and international ships which the Houthis are attacking in a reckless and indiscriminate manner. They say that they are only attacking Israeli ships, but that is simply not the case. They have attacked international ships with owners and crew of all different nationalities. Even hijacking and detaining a crew from Mexico, Ukraine, the Philippines and Bulgaria. That's the behavior of pirates. That's not the behavior of a group that seeks international support for a Yemen peace effort. That's the behavior of pirates.   

- Are you going to take additional measures if they continue their attacks against the international shipments?  

We have been very clear that we seek de-escalation in the Red Sea, but the Houthi attacks cannot continue. We are evaluating every day the situation in the Red Sea and elsewhere in the region, and what aggressive and militaristic steps the Iranians or the Houthis might be taking. But it is our fervent hope, and we're working every day on this, to de-escalate all of these conflicts.  

You've seen that American officials are working with Qatar and other countries for the release of the remaining hostages and a prolonged humanitarian pause to the fighting. We have made a strong push for more humanitarian assistance to Gaza, to address the tragic situation there. And we were very patient with the attacks on shipping until the situation became intolerable, and were forced to take action because of Houthi behavior. When their attacks stop, we can stop also.

- You don't want escalation. But nonetheless, the situation is just dragging the US into this, probably.

I fear that other parties may be wishing to escalate. And the Houthis by attacking a huge variety of ships, that was an escalation. Attacking Israel, and trying to hit the civilian populations, was an escalation. Again, these things do not help the Palestinians. They’re not bringing a single morsel of assistance or food to the Palestinian people, because of their actions. Nor are the Houthi attacks helping Yemen, which has one of the world’s largest humanitarian and economic disasters.  

They should stop. And we can return the focus to the Yemen peace effort, and put more effort towards supporting the Palestinians and their legitimate aspirations for a two-state solution, which Houthi behavior frankly is complicating and undermining.  

There isn't a single country in the Gulf that supports what the Houthis are doing; attacking international shipping, masquerading under the banner of support for the Palestinians, because the reality is that this behavior is contrary to supporting the Palestinians.

- Could you please elaborate more what you've been doing with the Saudis and the other countries in the region?  

We're working very closely with the Saudis, other regional actors and the Yemeni parties, on the Yemen peace effort. That's been the case since the start of this administration, reflecting the priority that the President placed on ending the Yemen conflict. We have appreciated Saudi Arabia's engagement mediating between the Houthis and the Yemen government, and helping contribute a roadmap for peace in Yemen, which the Houthi and the Yemen government and regional countries support.  

So ironically, while the world is focused on the Houthis’ reckless attacks on global shipping, tremendous progress was made in the past month on the peace process– captured in an announcement by the UN on December 23 last year – that an agreement has been reached. This is the best opportunity that Yemen has had for its peace process in nine years.  

Why are the Houthis jeopardizing peace by behaving like an armed militia group and a terrorist organization in attacking civilian shipping? Why are they driving away the attention from the Yemen peace effort, attention Yemeni peace needs and deserves? They are choosing to sabotage all the good work that so many parties have put into creating a dream that the Yemen conflict could finally be over – why are the Houthis – trying to throw that all away? Instead of prioritizing the Yemeni people?

- What are the immediate obstacles facing this political track led by the UN?

I think the obstacles are the recklessness of the Houthi behavior. Prior to their attacks, both the Yemen government and the Houthis had approved this roadmap that the UN now is able to try to operationalize. And again, this is the most tangible progress that’s been made in the Yemen conflict in 9 years. And that’s been put in jeopardy by the indiscriminate nature of the Houthi attacks on the Red Sea shipping. What international country would support a peace effort in Yemen when one of the parties - the Houthis - is attacking the global economy?  It is not the behavior of the Yemen government or any other party in Yemen that’s threatening the Yemen peace effort. It is the Houthis.  

- Iran is in the picture no matter how we speak negatively about the situation. So, this is a dilemma: how you're going to deal with it?  

Iran is a major threat, and in our conversations every day we talk about how to respond to the Iranian threat, especially in light of the killing of three service members in Jordan. Look at what we see Iran doing. We know that Iran is supporting, aiding and facilitating Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping. This is very convenient for Iran's regional agenda. It's not convenient for the Yemeni people, however. It's not convenient for other Arab countries.  

Look at the contents of a small ship that were seized about two weeks ago by US forces enforcing UN Security Council resolutions on not smuggling, to aid the Houthis or fan the conflict in Yemen. That particular ship was filled with lethal equipment heading toward the Houthis to be used for their attacks on Red Sea shipping. So, this is the behavior of those seeking to destabilize. This is not the behavior of members of the international community. So, we need everybody to dial it back, de-escalate, and return to the legitimate and genuine peace effort in Yemen that is now threatened by Houthi attacks.

We are talking to our partners multiple times a day. We have numerous engagements that we are planning to ensure that there is the speediest possible resolution in the Red Sea, which enables a return to the Yemen peace process. All of my efforts are focused on this particular line of effort.



US Ambassador: Hezbollah Ties to Iran Affect Lebanon and the Course of Talks

President Joseph Aoun presiding over a ceremony marking the 81st anniversary of General Security (Lebanese Presidency)
President Joseph Aoun presiding over a ceremony marking the 81st anniversary of General Security (Lebanese Presidency)
TT

US Ambassador: Hezbollah Ties to Iran Affect Lebanon and the Course of Talks

President Joseph Aoun presiding over a ceremony marking the 81st anniversary of General Security (Lebanese Presidency)
President Joseph Aoun presiding over a ceremony marking the 81st anniversary of General Security (Lebanese Presidency)

The stalled US-Iranian negotiations remain uncertain, and their direct or indirect impact on Lebanon continues to loom over efforts to achieve tangible results in talks with Israel, meanwhile President Joseph Aoun reaffirmed the state's commitment to its institutions and role.

US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa made notable remarks, linking developments in southern Lebanon to events unfolding between Washington and Tehran. He also stressed that any engagement with Hezbollah would take place only through the Lebanese state.

Aoun: State moving forward

Aoun said the state was continuing to strengthen its presence and institutions, alongside the negotiations.

"We are engaged in an internal struggle between people who do not want state institutions, who are the antithesis of the state and live at its expense in its absence, and between us and you, who want the state and its institutions," Aoun said during a ceremony marking the 81st anniversary of the General Security.

He added: “We here tell them, whatever you do, we will continue. Not for your sake, but for the sake of citizens to whom we owe a duty."

Issa: Southern Lebanon talks tied to Washington-Tehran Tension

US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa said negotiations over southern Lebanon cannot be separated from regional developments, particularly talks between Washington and Tehran.

He said Hezbollah must surrender its weapons to the state, adding that continued links between the group and Iranian decision-making are affecting Lebanon and the course of negotiations.

Ministerial sources said US-Lebanese-Israeli talks would continue, with a new round expected in Rome in September, but acknowledged that progress hinges partly on the outcome of US-Iranian negotiations and Tehran’s ties with Hezbollah.

Issa clarifies US position: Any Contact with Hezbollah to Go Through the State

US Ambassador Michel Issa clarified that any US engagement with Hezbollah would take place through the Lebanese state, saying Washington could help bridge differences through negotiations. He reiterated that Hezbollah must surrender its weapons and accused the group of taking orders from Iran.

Issa also said talks with Israel are between the Lebanese and Israeli states, with Washington seeking to narrow differences while pressing Israel to reduce strikes in southern Lebanon. He added that Hezbollah’s future would depend partly on whether Iran maintains its support for the group.


Arms Embargo: Can Washington Breach the Wall of Sudan’s War?

Massad Boulos, senior adviser to the US president for Arab and African affairs (AFP) 
Massad Boulos, senior adviser to the US president for Arab and African affairs (AFP) 
TT

Arms Embargo: Can Washington Breach the Wall of Sudan’s War?

Massad Boulos, senior adviser to the US president for Arab and African affairs (AFP) 
Massad Boulos, senior adviser to the US president for Arab and African affairs (AFP) 

The United States has stirred the stagnant waters of Sudan’s war by announcing plans to expand an arms embargo imposed on Darfur for more than two decades to cover the entire country.

The move appears aimed at shifting from limited sanctions to a direct attempt to reduce the warring parties’ ability to keep fighting and force them to reconsider the cost of seeking a military victory compared with returning to negotiations. It is a risky step, but one that also signals Washington’s determination to make a breakthrough in a war described as one of the world’s largest and most severe humanitarian crises.

Massad Boulos, senior advisor to the US president for Arab and African affairs, told the UN Security Council days ago that the US proposal would cover drones, related technologies and components, while strengthening the work of the sanctions panel of experts tasked with monitoring violations.

The current Darfur arms embargo expires Sept. 12, making the coming weeks a test of Washington’s ability to build consensus in the Security Council. Russia has voiced clear reservations, saying it would not accept measures affecting the Sudanese army’s capabilities, while China has taken a cautious position on expanding sanctions, leaving adoption of the proposal in its current form uncertain.

Washington views the proposed embargo as a pressure tool rather than merely a punitive measure. According to The Associated Press, the US administration believes restricting the flow of weapons to the belligerents could push them back to the negotiating table. UN political affairs chief Rosemary DiCarlo has meanwhile warned against the parties’ continued reliance on a military solution and the steady influx of sophisticated weapons.

Sudan’s Sovereignty Council chairman and army chief Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, however, has played down the possible impact of sanctions, saying they would neither affect Sudan nor weaken the armed forces’ resolve. He insisted the army would continue fighting until it retakes all areas controlled by the Rapid Support Forces.

The contrast shows the political struggle surrounding the US proposal. Washington wants to convince both sides that the flow of weapons cannot remain open-ended, while Sudan’s military leadership continues to speak in terms of retaking territory by force. The RSF is likewise reinforcing its positions and relying on supply networks, weapons and drones.

The US premise is that the ability to rearm prolongs the war: As long as each side believes it can replace its losses and obtain more drones, ammunition, fuel and financing, its incentive to compromise remains limited. If supplies become more difficult and costly, military calculations could gradually shift toward a settlement.

Drone use has expanded significantly in recent months, with attacks extending beyond front lines to cities, markets, electricity and water facilities and health infrastructure. Rosemary DiCarlo, the UN's under secretary-general for political and peacebuilding affairs, said sophisticated weapons, including drones, have become a major factor in increasing the war’s toll on civilians.

Restricting drones and their components, ammunition and heavy weapons could therefore yield an immediate humanitarian benefit by reducing long-range attacks, civilian casualties, displacement and disruption to hospitals and electricity and water networks, while improving humanitarian access.

But the plan’s success will depend on enforcement. The Darfur embargo, in place since 2005, failed to stop weapons from entering the region, exposing the limits of UN resolutions without effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.

Opposition Welcomes Proposal

Sudanese civilian opposition forces welcomed the US proposal while stressing that it should be linked to a comprehensive political process.

Khalid Omer Yousif, a leader in the Sumoud alliance, said pressure on both warring parties should be part of an “integrated package” to end the fighting and restore the civilian political process, rather than an isolated punitive measure.

Yasir Arman, head of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement–Revolutionary Democratic Current, warned that piecemeal measures could lead to “managing the war rather than ending it,” calling for a joint African Union-UN roadmap to halt the fighting and preserve Sudan’s unity.

The real test of Washington’s seriousness will be whether it can move from a Security Council resolution to pursuing supply networks, including flights, land routes, brokers, companies and individuals facilitating the purchase and transfer of weapons to Sudan.

Washington does not appear to be relying on the embargo alone to end the war. Rather, the proposal is likely part of a broader effort to raise the cost of continued fighting while pushing for negotiations. US officials say the goal is not to hand victory to one side over the other, but to reduce both sides’ ability to wage an open-ended war.

Ultimately, the seriousness of the US effort will be measured by its willingness to pressure the parties’ backers, not only the Sudanese belligerents themselves. If weapons continue to flow, expanding the embargo will amount to little more than a legal framework with limited effect. But if combined with monitoring, sanctions and simultaneous diplomatic pressure to reopen negotiations, it could become one of the strongest international tools of pressure deployed since the war began.

At its core, the US proposal brings two opposing calculations into direct confrontation: Washington wants to make continuing the war harder and more costly, while both sides insist on fighting until they recover all territory. Between them, civilians stand to benefit most from any measure that genuinely reduces the flow of instruments of war, even before a comprehensive political settlement is reached.

 

 

 


Syria Sentences to Death Former Regime Informant as Moscow Says Took in Assad on Humanitarian Grounds

The fourth Criminal Court of the transitional justice in Damascus sentences former regime informant Abdel Nasser Buraqi to death. (SANA)
The fourth Criminal Court of the transitional justice in Damascus sentences former regime informant Abdel Nasser Buraqi to death. (SANA)
TT

Syria Sentences to Death Former Regime Informant as Moscow Says Took in Assad on Humanitarian Grounds

The fourth Criminal Court of the transitional justice in Damascus sentences former regime informant Abdel Nasser Buraqi to death. (SANA)
The fourth Criminal Court of the transitional justice in Damascus sentences former regime informant Abdel Nasser Buraqi to death. (SANA)

The fourth Criminal Court of the transitional justice in Damascus issued on Thursday a death sentence against former regime informant Abdel Nasser Buraqi after convicting him of grave crimes during the rule of ousted President Bashar al-Assad.

The accusations include forced disappearance, denial of freedom, participation in murder, torture leading to death, theft and criminal defamation.

Lawyer Radif Mustafa, Director of the Accountability and Justice Department at the National Commission for Transitional Justice, told the state news agency SANA that the court relied on international law to characterize the offenses as war crimes and crimes against humanity, in line with the Constitutional Declaration, to determine the nature, gravity, and causes of the crimes. Meanwhile, the court based its sentencing on the provisions of Syrian national law

Mustafa said the court decided to merge the sentences and apply the harshest penalty, which is execution.

It upheld the provisional seizure of the convict's assets, converting it into an executive seizure, and denied him any discretionary mitigating circumstances due to the massive scale and gravity of the committed crimes, he said in a post on Facebook.

He added that the ruling was a "the first judicial precedent in Syria's history."

"While informants were protected during the era of the ousted regime, they are now facing justice. This is the group that harmed people the most," he stressed.

Meanwhile, internal security forces in Latakia announced the arrest of Major Generals Haitham Barakat and Marwan Barakat, both officers from the ousted regime, during an operation in the city of Qardaha.

This operation follows several similar ones across various governorates. Security forces in Daraa announced on August 15 the arrest of Musab Abu Rukba, a former regime lieutenant colonel in the Raqqa Political Security branch.

The forces said the arrests are part of counter-terrorism efforts aimed at strengthening security and stability.

Separately, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Russia granted Assad asylum on humanitarian grounds, not political ones.

Speaking at a press conference during which she was asked whether Moscow would turn him over to the new Syrian authorities, she replied: "There were and are no political grounds behind his stay in our country. The decision was made solely on humanitarian grounds: the dramatic circumstances of the change of power in Syria meant that he and his family faced death."

The authorities in Syria sentenced Assad to death in absentia earlier in August.