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.



Yemen Faces New Phase of Iranian Threat

An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
TT

Yemen Faces New Phase of Iranian Threat

An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).

Yemen’s internationally recognized government said it has entered a new phase in its confrontation with the Iran-backed Houthi movement after Iran operated a direct flight to Sanaa International Airport, controlled by the group, to transport senior Houthi officials to the funeral of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The government condemned the flight as a violation of Yemen’s sovereignty, while the Coalition to Restore Legitimacy in Yemen warned against any escalation threatening either Saudi Arabia or Yemen.

In response, Yemen’s Presidential Leadership Council, chaired by Rashad al-Alimi, held an emergency meeting with senior military and security officials, signaling that it views the issue as more than a civilian flight. The council said it challenged the state’s exclusive authority over its airspace, airports and international crossings.

The council argued the flight underscored the Houthis’ close ties to Tehran and their continued use of state institutions under their control to advance Iran’s agenda. It said the move violated UN Security Council resolutions and international law, testing the international community’s commitment to protecting Yemen’s sovereignty.

The government warned that allowing international flights without its approval would set a dangerous precedent, bypass legitimate institutions and entrench the country’s political division. It vowed to use political, legal and diplomatic means to defend its sovereignty.

The council also linked the flight to a pattern of Houthi actions, including attacks on international shipping and rejection of peace initiatives, saying the group continues to put Iran’s interests ahead of Yemen’s.

Saudi warning

The Saudi-led coalition said the issue extends beyond Yemen’s internal conflict and affects regional security.

Coalition spokesman Maj. Gen. Turki al-Maliki warned that the alliance would respond “with full force and unprecedented strength” to any attempt to target Saudi Arabia or undermine Yemen’s sovereignty.

Analysts say the statement draws red lines against any permanent Iranian presence at Sanaa airport while stressing that any response would remain consistent with international humanitarian law.

Peace efforts under strain

The escalation comes as regional and international mediators seek to preserve Yemen’s fragile truce despite stalled peace talks.

Houthi threats to establish regular Iranian flights to Sanaa have raised fears of a more dangerous phase in the conflict, particularly given longstanding accusations that Tehran supplies the group with weapons, military technology and advisers.

Yemen’s government stressed that Sanaa airport is not merely a humanitarian issue but one of sovereignty and international recognition. It urged the United Nations and the UN Security Council to move beyond condemnations and take concrete action against Iranian violations.

Meanwhile, the Saudi-led coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognized government has sought to underscore its continued backing for the Yemeni administration, while issuing clear deterrent signals against any moves that could threaten its security or alter the existing rules of engagement.


Is a New Showdown Looming Between al-Sadr and the Coordination Framework in Iraq?

Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
TT

Is a New Showdown Looming Between al-Sadr and the Coordination Framework in Iraq?

Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)

The decision by influential cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Sadrist Movement, to break his prolonged silence and publicly back Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s anti-corruption campaign appears to mark a turning point in Iraq’s political landscape.

It raises the prospect of a direct confrontation with the ruling Coordination Framework, after years in which rivalry between the two sides was largely confined to electoral politics and political maneuvering rather than open confrontation.

The first notable response came from former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, leader of the State of Law Coalition, who defended the Framework as a political project that had “proven its success.” His remarks were widely interpreted as an attempt to contain mounting pressure on the ruling Shiite alliance that has varying ties to Iran.

The developments come amid signs of growing divisions within the Framework, which emerged after the 2021 elections as an alternative to the Shiite alliances that had dominated Iraqi politics since 2005.

Al-Sadr’s silence

After the 2021 elections, al-Sadr sought to form a “national majority government” with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, led by Masoud Barzani, and a Sunni alliance headed by former Parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi.

The effort collapsed because of the so-called “blocking third,” which prevented the election of a president by the constitutionally required majority and prolonged Iraq’s political deadlock.

In the summer of 2022, al-Sadr withdrew his lawmakers from parliament and announced his departure from political life, declaring that he refused to “participate with the corrupt in any form.”

He also said he would not take part in elections “while the corrupt remain,” urging his supporters to preserve their political and grassroots organization in preparation for a future stage should circumstances change.

Since then, al-Sadr has boycotted every subsequent election, including the most recent one, despite repeated calls — including from rivals within the Framework — to return to politics.

Anti-corruption campaign reshapes the landscape

The political equation shifted with al-Zaidi’s recent anti-corruption campaign, which reached its peak with the arrest of 21 political and parliamentary figures in the operation dubbed “Dawn Strike.”

The campaign gained further momentum after investigating judge Diaa Jaafar revealed that part of the embezzled funds had been used to finance election campaigns, raising broader questions about the integrity of the most recent elections and the influence of political money on their outcome.

Observers said these developments have given al-Sadr political ground that aligns with the position he adopted after leaving parliament: refusing to participate in what he considers a political system tainted by corruption.

Settlement or political realignment?

Al-Zaidi became prime minister after the Coordination Framework failed to agree on a candidate from within its own ranks.

After former Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani was effectively ruled out for a second term and al-Maliki’s candidacy faltered amid domestic and international objections, specifically from the US, political factions turned to a figure from outside Iraq’s traditional political class.

A businessman in his 40s, al-Zaidi is widely seen as an acceptable choice for Washington, while Iran has reacted with unusual caution, reflecting what many observers see as a decline in its influence in Iraq compared with previous years.

His early decisions attracted attention, including his announcement not to attend the funeral of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which was attended by several Coordination Framework leaders and an official Iraqi delegation headed by President Nizar Amidi.

He has also pledged to strengthen ties with the United States and is expected to visit Washington in July.

Domestically, al-Zaidi has vowed to press ahead with mostly pro-Iran disarming armed factions, giving them until September to surrender their weapons, an issue successive Iraqi governments have failed to resolve because of its political and security complexities.

Al-Sadr breaks his silence

The turning point came when al-Sadr fully endorsed the anti-corruption campaign, describing al-Zaidi as a “soldier of reform.” The move went beyond political support, giving the government broad popular backing.

Pro-government demonstrations followed, while Sadrist leaders began openly supporting the campaign after months of silence awaiting al-Sadr’s instructions.

Observers viewed this as the first broad political and popular alignment against Iraq’s ruling establishment since 2003, particularly because the anti-corruption campaign has targeted figures associated with influential factions within the Coordination Framework.

The political stakes are heightened by the fact that al-Zaidi’s priorities — combating corruption and bringing all weapons under state control — overlap with those of US President Donald Trump’s administration toward Iraq.

Analysts said this creates a convergence of interests between Washington and the Sadrist Movement, despite their fundamental differences on other issues.

Pressure mounts on the Coordination Framework

The convergence does not amount to a direct political alliance between al-Sadr and the US administration. However, it gives al-Zaidi’s government support from two actors traditionally viewed as standing on opposite sides of Iraq’s political divide, thereby increasing pressure on the Coordination Framework.

In response, al-Maliki defended the alliance in a post on X, saying it had served as “the incubator of the national political process” and that its success was reflected in its role in forming three successive governments.

“There is no reason to abandon a project that has proven successful,” he wrote, adding that the Coordination Framework “will remain as it was founded, preserving its principles, identity and founders,” while arguing that any reform should be limited to improving its mechanisms and performance, without altering the essence of the project.


Israeli Military Says Killed Armed Militant in South Lebanon

This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
TT

Israeli Military Says Killed Armed Militant in South Lebanon

This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /

The Israeli military said on Saturday that it killed an armed militant in the "security zone" under its control in south Lebanon.

The military said in a statement on Saturday that Israeli soldiers “identified an armed terrorist operating inside the Security Zone, in the Majdal Zoun area in southern Lebanon," adding that troops "opened fire at the terrorist" and, after conducting "extensive searches", then "eliminated" him.

Lebanon's state-run National News Agency (NNA) said an Israeli helicopter carried out "a broad sweep operation on the outskirts" of Majdal Zoun and launched five missiles towards the village, without specifying a target or immediately reporting casualties.

The NNA also reported on Saturday that an Israeli strike on the village of Mansouri wounded one person, and reported Israeli artillery shelling elsewhere.

Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in US-Israeli strikes days earlier.

Israel responded with heavy airstrikes and a ground invasion of southern Lebanon, where its troops still occupy swathes of territory near the border.

At the end of June, Lebanon and Israel agreed to a US-backed framework aiming to pave the way for a permanent end to hostilities.