Houthis, Yemen, and the Red Sea: A Complex Web of Power and Conflict

Overview of Yemen’s Houthis and regional dynamics

Attention from the international press has focused on the Red Sea disruptions and the militias known as the Houthis. They emerged from Yemen, a country ravaged by a long, lingering civil conflict. In discussions with EL PERIÓDICO of the Prensa Ibérica group, Mark N. Katz, a professor of Politics and Government at George Mason University and a non‑resident fellow at the Atlantic Council, explains who these militias are and what drew them into the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in recent years.

Before 2014 the Houthis were not widely known beyond their capital, Sanaa. Why did they rise to become a major regional force in the Arabian Peninsula? It is not accurate to say they appeared abruptly in 2014. They traced roots to Yemen’s northern highlands and belong to the Zaydi branch of Shiism. Their history is tied to earlier political and religious traditions that shaped the country long before modern borders existed. Over decades Yemen depended on external powers, with Saudi Arabia and other actors shaping power dynamics. The country’s history includes a period of monarchy and later republican rule, painting a complex backdrop for any contemporary movement.

So what happened after that?

Abdullah Saleh rose to power in 1978. Under his leadership, resentment toward the Houthis began to crystallize after the killing of a Houthi leader, which led to sustained rebel activity. Between 2006 and 2014 there were multiple rounds of conflict. The Houthis are part of a distinct strand of Shiism, and their early ties were not solely defined by alignment with Iran. The Arab Spring of 2011 pressured Yemen’s president to resign but did not end his influence, and alliances formed that included the Houthis against other rivals. In 2017, with the backing of Saudi Arabia, the situation shifted when the president was perceived as aligning against the Houthis, an event that further complicated Yemen’s political landscape.

Who bears responsibility for the human rights violations in the clashes between the Riyadh‑led coalition and the Houthis?

There is no simple moral dichotomy. Yemen hosts a web of competing actors and factions. The Houthis gained public prominence when they entered Sanaa, and this moment is visible in their online videos and public image. The reality on the ground involves a multitude of groups with varying agendas, often aligned with regional powers and local authorities rather than a single unified force.

Why did the Houthis decide to engage in the Gaza conflict in such rapid fashion? Is there external influence?

External factors likely played a role. Iran is reported to have provided support after the Houthis consolidated power, including more modern weapons. Yet Yemen’s own society is heavily armed, with weapon proliferation already commonplace among diverse communities. Additional support may have broadened the Houthis’ capabilities, but more factors are at play in any maritime attacks. The movements have gained legitimacy through actions perceived as standing up to external pressure. They also connect deeply with a regional and historical sense of solidarity around the Palestinian issue. This blend of motivations helps explain their willingness to confront maritime traffic in the Red Sea, even as this course provokes international responses. The Houthis appear satisfied with the momentum, finding purpose in confrontation that resonates with their internal project and regional stance.

What is Russia’s role in this situation?

In Yemen, Russia maintains relationships with multiple parties and has publicly avoided full alignment with any single faction apart from jihadist groups. The pattern echoes earlier Soviet behavior, when Moscow supported various actors in similar conflicts. Recent events show a shift toward portraying the United States as the principal antagonist, leveraging the broader geopolitical dispute. While there have been rumors about fighters from other groups aiding the Houthis, clear evidence remains elusive.

What lies ahead?

The Houthis justify their actions as a response to the war in Gaza, suggesting that if that conflict ends they might ease their pace. The Saudis, for their part, face a challenging balance between strategic interests and domestic pressure about ongoing hostilities. The attacks have complicated potential rapprochements between Riyadh and the Houthis, at least in the short term.

Is the military campaign against Houthi bases effective?

The coalition led by Anglo‑American forces aims to dismantle the infrastructure behind these attacks. Yemen’s rugged terrain and mountainous geography complicate countermeasures, allowing hidden arsenals to persist. While operational pressure can reduce capabilities, a complete eradication of attacks remains unlikely. The Houthis can modulate their tempo, maintaining leverage without constant exertion of force.

How might the conflict influence prospects for peace?

A ceasefire had expired and then experienced lapses in adherence. The Saudis hoped for a decisive march forward but found Yemen’s political landscape resistant to simple outcomes. There is no appetite for a total return to war, and many parties recognize that military victory is elusive in this terrain. The path to durable peace remains uncertain, requiring sustained diplomacy and regional acknowledgment of Yemen’s complex internal dynamics.