Yemen: Triple Terrorist Threat under Iranian Cover

People stand next to wreckage at the site of a car bomb attack in Yemen's capital Sanaa June 29, 2015. (Reuters)
People stand next to wreckage at the site of a car bomb attack in Yemen's capital Sanaa June 29, 2015. (Reuters)
TT
20

Yemen: Triple Terrorist Threat under Iranian Cover

People stand next to wreckage at the site of a car bomb attack in Yemen's capital Sanaa June 29, 2015. (Reuters)
People stand next to wreckage at the site of a car bomb attack in Yemen's capital Sanaa June 29, 2015. (Reuters)

The developments in Yemen in recent days have revealed that the terrorist Iran-backed Houthi militias are providing cover for the al-Qaeda and ISIS groups in the war-torn country through Tehran’s direct backing.

The Yemeni Interior Ministry had revealed the arrest of a Houthi terrorist cell that was operating under ISIS and Qaeda guise to destabilize Yemen and target state leaderships. The Yemen military also announced the launch of a wide-scale security operation to crackdown on ISIS and remaining members of al-Qaeda who are present in the western countryside of the southern Taiz province.

This raises the question on whether the Houthis have paved the ground for the spread of terrorism throughout Yemen.

Experience has shown that terrorism and its various affiliates thrive in unstable conditions. This is why, since the Houthi coup of 2014, terrorist organizations in Yemen have sought to take advantage of the poor security on the ground in order to impose their influence in the country.

Experts have, however, pointed to the deep ideological and organizational differences between al-Qaeda and ISIS that have sometimes led to clashes between them. Moreover, Iran also adopts different ideologies than these two groups, so what could possibly bring all three of them together?

Observers of the situation in Yemen would explain that the Houthis are keen on working with ISIS and al-Qaeda in order to ultimately further Iran’s interests in the country.

In an article in the Washington Post last year, Oxford University researcher Elisabeth Kendall details how al-Qaeda was able to bolster its presence in Yemen, saying it “increased its numbers and war chest by staging a massive jailbreak, seizing military hardware and robbing the central bank.”

“The key to al-Qaeda’s success was not direct recruitment. Even at its peak, its core fighters numbered no more than 4,000. Rather, it worked to secure buy-in from key city and tribal leaders and to win passive toleration from local populations,” she explained.

“Unlike the ISIS, al-Qaeda decided on a gradualist approach to governance and struck a local power-sharing deal,” she went on to say.

Yemen is very valuable for al-Qaeda, especially after its greatest competitor, ISIS, suffered severe blows there.

Al-Qaeda realizes that Yemen lies in a strategic location where it could pose a threat to regional and international security. The group could also expand north into other parts of Yemen and even into neighboring Saudi Arabia.

ISIS, meanwhile, did not enjoy a prominent presence in Yemen before the Houthi coup. As the organization suffered blows in Iraq and Syria, many of its fleeing members sought refuge in Yemen, especially in advanced positions that were held by the Houthis. Moreover, defections within al-Qaeda also fell in ISIS’ favor. The group had gained enough ground in 2015 and 2016 to even declare the establishment of alleged “states” in Yemen.

Ultimately, however, ISIS could never compete with al-Qaeda, which wields greater influence in Yemen. Furthermore, a merger between the two groups was never an option. One senior Qaeda member had once said that ISIS’ ideology seemed too “alien” to the group.

On the ground, ISIS failed in winning over the people. It was unable to come up with a specific cultural vision that appeals to the Yemeni people. It also did not take part in development projects in the country and came under criticism from former ISIS members, who had defected from the group to al-Qaeda.

In contrast, al-Qaeda appears more ideologically cohesive than ISIS, which, in turn, posed a greater threat to Yemen through its operations. A sign of this bloody agenda was ISIS’ claiming of 2015 bombings of two Sanaa mosques that left 142 people dead. Al-Qaeda had, at the time, distanced itself from the attacks, saying that ISIS found it easy to shed blood.

Tensions between the rival groups escalated into clashes on the ground, notably in the southern provinces in what was seen as al-Qaeda feeling threatened by ISIS’ infiltration into the area. The group sought to confront its rival and bar it from seeping into a region where it has for years sought to entrench itself.

Again, what could possibly bring together such seemingly different groups under the same umbrella?

The Houthis and al-Qaeda may have ideological differences, but a close reading of United Nations Security Council reports on Yemen since 2014 reveal the ties between slain former President Ali Abdullah Saleh and al-Qaeda. They also implicate the Houthis in planting explosives in Yemeni cities and blaming the attacks on ISIS. This underscores the complicity between the Houthis and al-Qaeda, revealing that they are ultimately two sides of the same coin and that they are both products of Iran. It also demonstrates the double role played by Iran, in that it has forged ties with each of al-Qaeda and the Houthis.

What about ISIS? Is there evidence of Iran’s backing of the group in Yemen?

On the surface, Tehran had launched a religious edict to combat ISIS, but in reality, it has benefited the most from the group’s emergence in the region. Iran, which has not ceased its verbal condemnation of the group, has never fought it on the ground. In turn, ISIS, which openly claims enmity to Shiites, avoids attacking Iranian interests, confirming that the two sides have common goals.

Iranian-American researcher at Harvard University, Dr. Majid Rafizadeh revealed that Tehran had used ISIS to bolster its regional power. He explained that it had used the emergence of the group in Syria and Iraq to justify the presence of its militias in these countries. Iran will not actually act on its claims that it wants to eliminate ISIS because it is in its interest for the terrorist group to remain. Some observers have even described ISIS as Iran’s Trojan Horse.

Returning to Yemen, does the evil of alliance of the Houthis, Iran and ISIS appear to be gaining ground against the international coalition? The Arab coalition has scored major victories against the terrorist militias. It has also managed to capture 85 percent of regions that were on the verge of falling in Houthi clutches.



Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
TT
20

Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)

Israel has voiced growing concerns over Egypt’s military presence in the Sinai Peninsula, fearing a potential escalation between the two sides amid the ongoing Gaza war.

Israeli media reports said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has asked both Washington and Cairo to dismantle what it describes as a “military infrastructure” established by the Egyptian army in Sinai.

However, an informed Egyptian source and experts cited by Asharq Al-Awsat insisted that Egypt has not violated its peace treaty with Israel. They argued that Cairo’s military movements are a response to Israeli breaches of the agreement.

Israel’s Israel Hayom newspaper, citing a senior Israeli security official, reported that Egypt’s military buildup in Sinai constitutes a “major violation” of the security annex of the peace treaty.

The official said the issue is a top priority for Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, stressing that Israel “will not accept this situation” amid what it views as Egypt’s growing military footprint in the peninsula.

The official added that the issue goes beyond the deployment of Egyptian forces in Sinai exceeding the quotas set under the military annex of the Camp David Accords.

The real concern, he said, lies in Egypt’s continued military buildup in the peninsula, which Israel views as an irreversible step.

Moreover, he stressed that while Israel is not seeking to amend its peace treaty with Egypt or redeploy troops along the border, it believes the current situation requires urgent action to prevent a potential escalation.

Egypt-Israel relations have not seen such tensions since the outbreak of the Gaza war, particularly after Israel violated a ceasefire agreement with Hamas brokered primarily by Egypt. Israeli forces resumed airstrikes on Gaza last month and failed to fulfill their commitments to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor and Palestinian border crossings.

A senior Egyptian source dismissed Israel’s accusations, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that “these repeated Israeli pretexts ignore the fact that Israeli forces have violated the peace treaty, seizing control of areas where Egypt objects to their presence without the necessary coordination with Cairo.”

Egypt has the right to take all necessary measures to safeguard its national security against any threats, emphasized the source.

“Nevertheless, Cairo remains fully committed to the peace treaty and has no intention of aggression against any party,” it added.

Israeli forces seized control of the Gaza-Egypt border, including the Philadelphi Corridor and the Rafah crossing, in May 2024. Israel has accused Egypt of not doing enough to stop weapons smuggling into Gaza through border tunnels—an allegation Cairo has denied.

Under the terms of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas, which Israel later broke, Israeli forces were supposed to begin withdrawing from the Philadelphi Corridor on March 1, completing the pullout within eight days. However, Israel failed to do so and instead resumed airstrikes on Gaza.

Israel also announced the creation of an administration aimed at facilitating the “voluntary departure” of Gaza residents, a move Cairo strongly rejected and formally condemned.

Egypt has insisted that Palestinians must remain in their homeland and has put forward a reconstruction plan for Gaza and called for the implementation of the two-state solution. The plan was endorsed at an emergency Arab summit three weeks ago.

Media reports have indicated that Egypt responded to Israel’s control of the Gaza border by increasing its military presence near the frontier—an act that some Israeli officials claim violates the peace treaty and threatens Israel’s security.

Former Egyptian intelligence official Gen. Mohammed Rashad told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel itself violated the peace treaty by seizing the Philadelphi Corridor, controlling border crossings, and blocking aid to Gaza while seeking to forcibly displace Palestinians into Egypt.

“Every Israeli action along Gaza’s border with Egypt constitutes hostile behavior against Egypt’s national security,” said Rashad, who previously headed the Israeli military affairs division in Egypt’s intelligence service.

“Egypt cannot sit idly by in the face of such threats and must prepare for all possible scenarios.”

The Philadelphi Corridor is a strategically sensitive buffer zone, serving as a narrow 14-kilometer passage between Egypt, Israel, and Gaza, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea in the north to the Kerem Shalom crossing in the south.

Military expert General Samir Farag insisted that Egypt has not violated the peace treaty or its security annex in over 40 years, arguing that Israel has repeatedly breached the agreement and is attempting to shift blame onto Cairo.

“Israel is doing this to distract from its internal problems, including public discontent over its ballooning defense budget,” Farag told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“It also wants to deflect attention from Egypt’s reconstruction plan for Gaza and leverage its claims to pressure the United States for more military aid by portraying Egypt as a threat.”

Farag emphasized that Egypt’s actions are solely aimed at protecting its national security, adding: “There is no clause in the peace treaty that prevents a country from defending itself.”

“The so-called ‘military infrastructure’ Israel refers to consists of roads and development projects in Sinai.”

“The US has satellite surveillance over the region—if Egypt had violated the treaty, Washington would have flagged it. Moreover, security coordination between Egypt and Israel continues daily,” he explained.

Egypt and Israel signed their landmark peace treaty on March 25, 1979, committing to resolving disputes peacefully and prohibiting the use or threat of force. The agreement also established military deployment guidelines and a joint security coordination committee.

Meanwhile, US Republican Party member Tom Harb told Asharq Al-Awsat that Washington has received intelligence from multiple sources indicating that Egypt has amassed a significant military force in Sinai.

Israel considers this a breach of the peace treaty, which designates Sinai as a demilitarized zone to prevent surprises like the 1973 war, Harb said.

While the US fully supports Israel’s concerns, it also wants to prevent further escalation, as that would destabilize the region, he added.

Ultimately, Egypt must clarify whether its troop movements are aimed at threatening Israel or preventing Palestinians from crossing into Egyptian territory, he stated.