Analysts, Officials Call on Biden to Increase Pressure on Houthis

Displaced Yemeni children in Marib. (AFP)
Displaced Yemeni children in Marib. (AFP)
TT

Analysts, Officials Call on Biden to Increase Pressure on Houthis

Displaced Yemeni children in Marib. (AFP)
Displaced Yemeni children in Marib. (AFP)

The new American administration has been taking serious and intense steps to end the crisis in Yemen and end the escalation of the Iran-backed Houthi militias on civilians in Yemen and infrastructure in Saudi Arabia.

However, several analysts and officials are urging Joe Biden’s administration against being lenient with the Houthis, calling on him to instead increase pressure on the militias that are still relentlessly waging their war on Yemen.

Republican Senator Michael McCaul tweeted last week: “Over the past several weeks, I called for the administration to apply more pressure on the Houthis to end the violent conflict in Yemen.”

He welcomed the US sanctions against two senior Houthi leaders for procuring weapons from Iran and attacking civilians.

"While this action is appreciated, I urge the administration to continue applying pressure to all parties so a negotiated solution to end this devastating war can occur,” he added.

Kirsten Fontenrose, of the Atlantic Council in Washington, said the situation in Yemen was deteriorating because the Houthis have been emboldened by the recent decisions by the Biden administration and their recent military success in Marib. At the same time, the Houthis believe they have no reason to turn to negotiations or agree to a political settlement that could reflect their actual numbers among the people.

In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, she said any political understanding the American administration may now reach could exaggerate the Houthis’ actual representation on the ground. Moreover, she noted that it would only be a matter of a handful of months before the agreement is rejected by other Yemenis.

An agreement would not put the Saudis at ease or offer them a sense that the US wants to protect their interests in Yemen, she added. At the same, they trust newly-appointed US envoy Tim Lenderking, but they still feel that Biden’s openness to Iran over a new nuclear deal means Washington is ready to abandon Saudi security for the sake of reaching an agreement with the Houthis that would also please Tehran.

Fontenrose, who had worked at the White House and Department of State during the terms of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, said Lenderking is leading international talks aimed at reaching a political solution in Yemen. She added that he is respected in the region and boasts a great working relationship with UN envoy Martin Griffiths. The Houthis, on the other hand, are doing nothing to forge long-term ties with him because they were not part of influential legitimate Yemeni politicians over the decades during which Lenderking was involved in diplomacy with the Gulf.

Lenderking is aware that ending the war in Yemen is a priority for the American administration and that its end will be beneficial to Saudi Arabia and Iran alike in terms of their reputation in Washington, Fontenrose said. She remarked, however, that the administration’s recent actions left him with few carrots and sticks to motivate the Houthis to end their push in Marib and agree on a political arrangement that is supported by the rest of Yemen.

The administration must obtain from Iran a drive to end the war in Yemen, which Tehran is not at all seeking, she went to say. The strategy must also force the Houthis to offer concessions in recognition of the favorable American moves towards them, but they are not.

Fontenrose criticized the strategy for presenting several favors to the Houthis without asking them for anything in return. It removed their terror designation, ended US support to the Saudi-led Arab coalition and froze offensive arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The Houthis responded to these positive moves by attacking Riyadh, forging ahead in the offensive on Marib and preventing UN inspectors from accessing the Safer tanker, which risks an environmental disaster off Hodeidah. The US abandoned most of its influence before even kicking off political negotiations.

Fontenrose said the US could persuade Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region to join a non-aggression pact with Iran. Such a deal should demand that Iran cease its support to the Houthis in exchange for assertions that Saudi Arabia would request the US to reduce the number of its forces, which may perhaps lead to an end to support to Iranian opposition groups.

Political analyst at the Atlantic Council, Carmiel Arbit, meanwhile, told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Biden administration’s decision to revoke the Houthis’ terror designation helped create a space for not only relief efforts, but diplomacy. She said the move reflected a more pragmatic, possibly even sympathetic, approach, towards Iran compared to the maximum pressure policy of the former administration.

What next? Arbit said that after six years of bloody conflict, there appears to be no simple solution to the crisis. Moreover, it is growing increasingly difficult to reunite the country. On the short term, relief efforts must be a priority for each of the US and international community. The Biden administration will likely approach Yemen the same way it does Iran whereby it will search for opportunities to ease tensions between Arab Gulf allies with Iran, while at the same time resort to punitive measures, such as targeted sanctions, and seek to secure small gains wherever they may be.

In an article to the Council on Foreign Relations, former US Special Representative for Iran, Elliot Abrams said the Trump administration’s decision to call the Houthis terrorists is attributed to their repeated acts of terrorism. “And the main critique of the Biden administration’s revocation of that decision is equally simple: the Houthis have long committed, and continue to commit, acts of terror. They should be designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) because they are an FTO.”

“The motivation for the Biden decision is clear: the FTO designation may have a negative humanitarian impact in Yemen. It may also be that the administration concluded the terrorism designation would make negotiating with the Houthis more complex, thereby hindering efforts to end the war,” he added.

“But if one’s central goal is to end the war, what is the impact of this FTO reversal regarding the Houthis? Is it clear that they will react by changing their behavior and stopping acts of terror? Wish Mr. Lenderking good luck, for he has been handed a most difficult file,” he continued.

“Logic suggests an alternative view: that the Houthis will be less inclined to negotiate, especially because the administration’s decision comes only days after its statement that it would no longer support offensive military operations by Saudi Arabia in Yemen. If I were a Houthi leader, I might conclude ‘I am winning. The Americans want out. They’ve walked away from the Saudis and reversed the terrorism designation even though my own behavior has not changed. Why negotiate?’ If that is right, the Biden administration ought to be thinking hard about ways to change the incentive structure it has backed into,” Abrams said.



Lebanese Army Chief Faces Labeling Dispute During Washington Visit

Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
TT

Lebanese Army Chief Faces Labeling Dispute During Washington Visit

Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)

What was meant to be a routine visit by Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal to Washington to discuss military support and aid coordination turned into a political flashpoint, after a brief meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham ignited a dispute over whether the army chief would describe Hezbollah as a “terrorist organization.”

The controversy was sparked by a brief meeting with hardline Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who publicly said he cut the meeting short after Haykal declined to use the designation in what he called the “context of Lebanon.”

What happened in the Graham meeting

In a post on X, Graham said: “I just had a very brief meeting with the Lebanese Chief of Defense General Rodolphe Haykal. I asked him point blank if he believes Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. He said, “No, not in the context of Lebanon.” With that, I ended the meeting.”

“They are clearly a terrorist organization. Hezbollah has American blood on its hands. Just ask the US Marines,” he added.

“They have been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by both Republican and Democrat administrations since 1997 – for good reason.”

“As long as this attitude exists from the Lebanese Armed Forces, I don’t think we have a reliable partner in them.”

“I am tired of the double speak in the Middle East. Too much is at stake,” Graham concluded.

The reaction went beyond expressions of displeasure. Some US coverage suggested Graham effectively raised questions about the “usefulness” of continuing support for the Lebanese army if such a gap persists between the US position and Lebanon’s official language.

Haykal’s answer raises its cost in Washington

Inside Lebanon, the issue is not limited to the stance on Hezbollah. Still, it extends to the army’s role as a unifying institution in a country whose political balance rests on sectarian arrangements and deep sensitivities.

Adopting an external designation, even a US one, in official language by the head of the military could be interpreted domestically as a move that risks triggering political and sectarian division or drawing the army into confrontation with a component that has organized political and popular representation.

That explains why Lebanese voices, including some critics of Hezbollah, defended the logic that “the state does not adopt this classification.” Therefore, the army commander cannot formally do so.

In other words, Haykal sought to avoid two conflicting languages: Washington’s legal and political framing of Hezbollah, and the Lebanese state’s language, which walks a fine line between the demand for exclusive state control over arms and the avoidance of reproducing internal fractures.

US State Department position

Amid the controversy surrounding the Graham meeting, an official US position emerged on Tuesday through the US Embassy in Beirut, welcoming the visit and focusing on the core US message.

The statement said that “the Lebanese Armed Forces’ ongoing work to disarm non-state actors and reinforce national sovereignty as Lebanon’s security guarantor is more important than ever.”

The wording was notable because it separated two levels: continued US reliance on the army as a state institution, and, in practice, linking that reliance to the issue of disarming non-state actors.

The phrase avoids direct naming but, in the Lebanese context, is widely understood to refer primarily to Hezbollah.

The visit’s broader track

Despite the political awkwardness, Haykal’s visit was not reduced to a single meeting. He held senior-level military talks, including meetings with US Central Command chief Admiral Brad Cooper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine.

According to a statement from a Joint Chiefs spokesperson, the meeting “reaffirmed the importance of enduring US defense relationships in the Middle East.”

The visit coincided with broader discussions in Washington on support for the Lebanese army and plans to extend state authority, as international reports spoke of Lebanon entering new phases of a plan to dismantle illegal weapons structures in the south and north.

The army commander’s visit had initially been delayed for reasons that add another layer to understanding Washington’s sensitivity to the military’s language.

In November 2025, sources quoted the US State Department as saying Washington canceled scheduled meetings with the Lebanese army commander after objecting to an army statement on border tensions with Israel, prompting the visit to be postponed to avoid a pre-emptive political failure.


Egypt Steps Up Efforts to Support Gaza Administration Committee After Entry Stalled

Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Egypt Steps Up Efforts to Support Gaza Administration Committee After Entry Stalled

Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)

Egypt is intensifying efforts to back the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, hoping it can begin operating inside the enclave to implement commitments under the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, which started about two weeks ago but has yet to take shape on the ground.

Experts told Asharq Al-Awsat that those Egyptian efforts, through phone calls and meetings with international partners, are focused on two main objectives: pushing for the deployment of police forces and an international stabilization force on the one hand, and securing a gradual Israeli withdrawal on the other, increasing pressure on Israel to move the agreement forward.

A member of the administration committee said in a brief phone statement to Asharq Al-Awsat, speaking on condition of anonymity, that there is still no specific date for entering the enclave.

In the Slovenian capital, Ljubljana, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stressed Cairo’s full support for the work of the committee headed by Dr. Ali Shaath.

He made the remarks during a dialogue session of the Arab-Islamic committee on Gaza with Slovenian Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon.

The foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Bahrain attended the meeting. Abdelatty stressed the importance of the committee’s role in managing the daily affairs of Gaza’s residents and meeting their basic needs during the transitional phase.

He underscored the need to ensure the continued flow of humanitarian and relief aid into the enclave, as well as the formation and deployment of an international stabilization force to monitor the ceasefire.

Abdelatty reiterated his stance during a phone call on Friday with British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.

The Gaza committee, established under the ceasefire agreement, operates under the supervision of the Board of Peace, chaired by US President Donald Trump. The committee has been holding meetings in Cairo since it was announced last month and has yet to enter Gaza.

Ahmed Fouad Anwar, a member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs and an academic specializing in Israeli affairs, said Egypt is making significant efforts to facilitate the committee’s mission as quickly as possible and enable it to operate.

He said this would limit Israeli obstacles, increase pressure on Israel, and place it under the obligations set out in the plan, particularly withdrawal from Gaza. This would counter intense pressure from Tel Aviv to accelerate the disarmament of Hamas without implementing its Gaza agreement commitments.

Palestinian political analyst Abdel Mahdi Motawea said Israel objected not only to the committee’s work but even to its emblem.

He noted, however, that Israel is not the only party hindering the committee. Hamas and other factions want to impose conditions on the committee’s work.

He warned of serious concerns that the committee could be marginalized, stressing that Egypt’s extensive efforts to support it are crucial at this critical stage of the Gaza agreement.

Hamas announced days ago that it was ready to hand over management of the enclave to the committee, while Israel continues to obstruct it.

Anwar expects the committee to begin operating in the enclave soon if Egypt’s efforts and those of international partners succeed and Washington responds positively.

He warned that the committee's failure would threaten the ceasefire agreement.


Gaza Deal Mediators Have Few Options on Hamas Disarmament

Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
TT

Gaza Deal Mediators Have Few Options on Hamas Disarmament

Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)

Israel’s demand for the disarmament of Hamas has become the top priority since the second phase of the Gaza agreement began 10 days ago.

It exposed deep uncertainty over how such a step could be enforced amid firm resistance from the movement, which says it will not relinquish its weapons unless progress is made toward establishing a Palestinian state.

Analysts speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat said the issue has left mediators with minimal options, ranging from complete disarmament to freezing weapons, either by persuading Hamas or applying pressure.

The demand has become a political pressure tool that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others in Israel are likely to use increasingly in the run-up to elections, they added.

Israeli opposition figure Benny Gantz, who is preparing for elections, called on Thursday in a post on X for the “disarmament of Hamas.”

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that Israel will dismantle Hamas if it does not agree to lay down its arms.

Netanyahu, following a meeting on Tuesday with US envoy Steve Witkoff, said he was insisting on the non-negotiable demand to disarm Hamas before any step toward rebuilding Gaza.

Military and strategic analyst Brig. Gen. Samir Ragheb said mediators have few options other than reaching understandings or exerting pressure, noting that the demand to disarm Hamas has been echoed by Israel, Washington, the EU, and donors, and has become an obstacle to ending the war and launching reconstruction.

He said Netanyahu and others would use the issue electorally and as a pretext to collapse the agreement at any time, adding that the second phase is filled with “landmines,” particularly those related to the Israeli withdrawal, which Netanyahu does not want to address.

Strategic and military expert Maj. Gen. Samir Farag said available options are now limited, suggesting that freezing weapons may be more likely than complete disarmament, mainly since Hamas’ arsenal does not consist of missiles or drones and could be handed over.

He said there is US and Israeli insistence on implementing the weapons clause, but that it must coincide with an Israeli withdrawal and guarantees to prevent a new war.

By contrast, sources in Hamas told Reuters on Wednesday that the group had agreed to discuss disarmament with other Palestinian factions, but that neither Washington nor regional mediators had presented it with any detailed or concrete proposal on disarmament.

Israel’s Channel 13 reported in late January that the US was preparing a document granting Hamas several weeks to hand over its weapons to multinational forces within a set timeframe. Failure to comply would give Israel the green light to “act as it sees fit,” the channel said.

Farag stressed that Hamas’ room for maneuver is extremely limited and that it must quickly reach understandings with mediators, particularly Egypt, Qatar, and Türkiye, to resolve what he described as the most significant obstacle currently being created by Israel.

Ragheb said Hamas has no option but to implement US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan and the disarmament clause, warning against delaying or circumventing it, as “every day lost poses a threat to the ceasefire agreement.”

He added that police forces in the enclave would be deployed within days or weeks, along with a possible stabilization force, leaving little space for further maneuvering.