America in Yemen: A Bilateral Plan to Consolidate its Influence

The United States is firmly keen to consolidate the truce in Yemen after its diverse support for the Saudi and Emirati military operations reached a dead end, and international circumstances imposed them to de-escalate on this front in order to avoid any negative effects on oil supplies and maritime navigation. Therefore, Washington is forced to respond to the humanitarian demands of Sana’a. At the same time, it strengthens its control over vital areas within Yemen, through a series of military, political and “developmental” measures.

Although the armistice in Yemen would not have been achieved had it not been for the persistence of the Yemenis and their insistence on extracting their rights, the US administration treats it as one of its best foreign achievements.

It was an “achievement” that had to be dealt with as a result of the international situation resulting from the Ukrainian crisis, as the United States found an urgent need to quickly cool the Yemeni front, fearing that it would pose a threat to oil supplies and maritime navigation. Thus, what was impossible before that crisis became possible in a jiffy, and was even imposed on the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, which were forced to respond to some humanitarian demands that Sanaa had long made as a condition for any armistice or ceasefire. It seems that Washington, based on the same considerations, will work during the next stage to expand the scope of this response, after it has always used humanitarian files as a tool of war, which allows for more steps to be expected in terms of lifting the siege on Sanaa airport and the port of Hodeidah, and paying the Salaries of state employees in all governorates.

The United States considers that its interests are affected by what is happening in Yemen, and exiting this country will threaten its national security and strategic interests, especially with regard to maritime navigation and the protection of commercial sea lanes. What is meant here specifically is Bab al-Mandab, which is the southern entrance to the Red Sea; Washington attaches great importance to it, and “protecting” it is one of its biggest goals in the region, in an effort to prevent any competing international power, such as China and Russia, or an adversary regional such as Iran, from establishing a foothold in it, in addition to ensuring Israel’s security through it and ensuring the flow of gas and oil from it.

In this context, the commander of the US Fifth Fleet, Charles Bradford Cooper, announced in a press interview a few days ago that his country will increase its focus on ensuring maritime security and the stability of navigation in the Red Sea, through Bab al-Mandab and the Gulf of Aden. Cooper indicated that his country has established the new “joint duty force”, which is the first concerned with the aforementioned region. He also revealed that his forces are also preparing to deploy the latest fleet of unmanned aircraft there, by the summer of 2023, to “ensure regional maritime security.” and monitor any “destabilizing activity in the region, especially in vital waterways,” and quickly respond to deter these activities.

The Fifth Fleet in the US Navy had announced, in conjunction with the start of the first truce in early April, the formation of a division called the “Maritime Joint Task Force 153”, which its operations are focused on the Red Sea, in cooperation with international and regional partners.

The aforementioned measure is a unilateral American step, inseparable from the repercussions of the Russian-Ukrainian war, and as the commander of the 153rd Division indicated, to target the threats posed by “Ansar Allah” in the southern Red Sea.

It appears that the US plan to enhance its influence also includes the support of the “Presidential Council.”

In addition to the foregoing, it appears that the US plan to enhance its influence in Yemen also includes “support programs” for the “Presidential Council” – whose parts are wracked by differences – with no less than one billion dollars under the pretext of “humanitarian aid to the Yemeni people.” The plan also includes, according to the US ambassador to Yemen, Stephen Fagin, support for the Coast Guard and Border Guard forces of the government loyal to the Saudi-Emirati coalition, within the framework of what he called “joint efforts to combat terrorism”. The US is also supporting the council through the “American Development Agency”, especially in the field of institutional capacity building of the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance, as well as the health, education, water and sanitation sectors.

The US administration also agreed to resume cultural exchange programs with Yemen, especially the International Visitor Program, which was suspended for seven years. The US attempt to search for frameworks for a direct presence on behalf of its defeated allies in Yemen came after the war that it provided with various types of support has reached a dead end. What Washington is doing today is almost identical to what it has done under the pretext of “fighting terrorism” since 2000, when it used this file as a cover for its direct interventions, smashing the boundaries between the ambassador’s job and the work of the High Commissioner, and making the Yemeni government an entity entirely subordinate to it.