Houthis launch largest drone and missile attack targeting ships in Red Sea

Read the Full Transcript

• Amna Nawaz:

  Today, the U.N. Security Council demanded that Houthi rebels in Yemen stop attacking international ships in the Red Sea. The U.S. military says there have been more than two dozen attacks in the last seven weeks, the most serious yesterday, when Houthis fired more than 20 drones and missiles right at U.S. and allied warships.

  Nick Schifrin looks at the Houthi escalation and U.S. options.

• Nick Schifrin:

  In the middle of the Red Sea, British sailors shoot down incoming Houthi drones and missiles. The U.K. and U.S. called it the Houthis' largest and most complex attack.

  Secretary of State Antony Blinken:

  Antony Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State: If these attacks continue, as they did yesterday, there will be consequences.

• Nick Schifrin:

  British Defense Minister Grant Shapps:

• Grant Shapps, British Defense Minister:

  And we cannot have a situation where a major sea route, a major ability to move goods around the world is being cut off by terrorists and thugs, and we therefore must act.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Since mid-November, Houthi rebels have targeted, seized international vessels and kidnapped foreign sailors. The Houthis have said they target ships linked to Israel, but, today, a Houthi spokesman said the target was an American warship, retribution for the U.S. Navy last month sinking Houthi boats and killing 10 Houthi fighters.

• Yahya Sarea, Houthi Military Spokesman (through interpreter):

  The Yemeni Houthi armed forces affirm that they will not hesitate to deal appropriately with all hostile threats within the legitimate right to defend our country, people and nation.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Some 15 percent of world shipping goes through the Suez Canal, which links the Red Sea with the Mediterranean. Houthi attacks have so far upended international commerce, forcing shippers to reroute their vessels and increasing shipping costs.

  Last month, the U.S. launched a multinational coalition to protect commercial shipping. And, last week, the U.S. and 13 other countries issued what an official called a final warning. "The Houthis will bear the responsibility of the consequences should they continue to threaten lives, the global economy and the free flow of commerce in the region's critical waterways."

  But, so far, the U.S. has not followed through on that threat.

• John Kirby, NSC Coordinator For Strategic Communications:

  The best solution to this situation not escalating is for the Houthis to stop these attacks.

• Nick Schifrin:

  The Houthis are a rebel group backed by Iran that in 2014 seized the Yemeni capital, Sanaa. For years, they fought Saudi Arabia as part of a brutal civil war that killed hundreds of thousands, but, for 20 months, there's been a shaky cease-fire.

  Houthi missiles are based on Iranian technology, and a U.S. official tells "PBS NewsHour" Iran is coordinating the current attacks and helping provide the targets.

• Man:

  The draft resolution is adopted.

• Nick Schifrin:

  In New York today, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution demanding the Houthis cease all attacks and release two dozen foreign hostages.

  Barbara Woodward, British Ambassador to the United Nations: We will not stand by and allow the Houthis to threaten civilian vessels and hold global food and energy supplies hostage.

• Nick Schifrin:

  So what is motivating the Houthis to launch these attacks and what should the U.S. do about them?

  For that, we turn to Jonathan Panikoff, the director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council and the former deputy national intelligence officer for the Middle East.

  Jonathan Panikoff, thank you very much. Welcome to the "NewsHour."

  What do the Houthis gain by launching these attacks?

• Jonathan Panikoff, Atlantic Council:

  Thank you so much for having me.

  I think the Houthis really have very little to lose by launching them, is the way I would frame it. The Houthis don't have access to Yemen's energy resources. The Houthis are trying to negotiate a final resolution in terms of the long-running conflict with Saudi Arabia. I think it's provided them, I think, greater leverage probably in those negotiations.

  And so I think the Houthis see this as a realistic policy option in order to try and better their position for the long term in Yemen for the years to come.

• Nick Schifrin:

  But do they also risk something by continuing these attacks, especially after they came out today and said explicitly that the target was a U.S. Navy ship?

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  Certainly, they could.

  Obviously, the United States has put together a new coalition for the Red Sea. It's had multiple countries join, though, importantly, not some of the Gulf countries, like Saudi Arabia and the Emiratis, who have long been in conflict with the Houthis.

  So it's possible, obviously, the U.S. will respond. And we saw some discussion today and references that the U.S. and its allies are considering doing so. But the Houthis have been having a war for years now. I'm skeptical that a response, especially a one-time response or even two-time response, is necessarily going to deter them if they think that's really going to better their position in the months to come.

• Nick Schifrin:

  The U.S. last week gave what a U.S. official called a final warning. And you heard earlier today John Kirby from the National Security Council there clearly sending the message that still they hope the Houthis stop these attacks.

  Bottom line, do you think the U.S. should launch a military strike?

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  I think a military strike is probably going to be necessary at this point to try to restore deterrence.

  It's not that I think a military strike is necessarily likely to stop the Houthis from continuing their attacks, but not having the deterrence that the U.S. needs by refusing to respond or declining to respond also signals to other actors in the region, other Iranian-backed proxies that they too may have a level of freedom to engage in attacks against U.S. forces, whether in Iraq or in Syria, or that Hezbollah may be able to actually push the boundaries in Lebanon and into Israel.

  The U.S. has said very clearly that's its number one goal, is to avoid a regional conflict. I think not responding at this point risks deterrence not being taken seriously by our adversaries and actually bringing about the very conflict the U.S. is trying to avoid.

• Nick Schifrin:

  The other argument that I hear from experts who I spoke to today is that, look, a military strike would open up another front, which is a bad idea, and that any weapons or any capabilities of the Houthis that the U.S. destroyed would quickly be refilled by Iran.

  What's your response to that?

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  I think it's probably true that Iran certainly could refill the weapons.

  I think whether it opened up another front assumes that the front hasn't already opened. I think we have seen 26 Houthi attacks since the 19th of November. We're seeing 15 percent of all maritime commerce goes through the Red Sea. And you're starting to see huge amounts now having to go around at big cost to companies and countries.

  I think we're already really quite on the precipice of being there, of having another front to open. I actually worry much more that not responding now, as we haven't in a meaningful way for about a month-and-a-half, has clearly been a strategy that hasn't worked. If we don't respond now, I actually think it increases the chance that we end up in a regional conflict, not decreases it.

• Nick Schifrin:

  In some ways, could Saudi Arabia actually want the United States to launch this military strike, to degrade Houthi capabilities, and then to come in afterward and say, oh, we're the peacemaker, we're going to continue these talks with the Houthis?

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  I think the Saudis are certainly supportive of the military strikes, if the U.S. is successful in them. And that really means that the U.S. actually manages to be successful in having some level of deterrence.

  The flip side of that is that if the U.S. says we're going to do one strike or two strikes, but not actually keep the pressure on, then my guess is the Saudis are going to be pretty annoyed and feel like it didn't actually do much, because you didn't stay engaged in the conflict.

• Nick Schifrin:

  And, finally, let's talk about Iranian support.

  The National Security Council spokeswoman recently declassified intelligence, saying that Iran was — quote — "deeply involved in planning the operations against commercial vessels" and was — quote — "providing tactical intelligence on that vessel's locations."

  How does that work?

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  There's a long history of Iran providing varying degrees of support to its various partners and proxies throughout the region, and that includes the Houthis.

  In this case, it means that the Iranians may have identified targets that they have passed to the Houthis. It could mean that the Iranians have certain targets that they have known for years they have wanted Houthis to strike, or it could mean that the Houthis identified targets and went to the Iranians to validate them, to say, does this make sense?

  So, I think there's a variety of ways that that can work, but the bottom line is, one way or the other, Iranian support for the Houthis is helping them to take these strikes successfully.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Jonathan Panikoff for the Atlantic Council, thank you very much.

• Jonathan Panikoff:

  Thank you.

Improved audio player available on our mobile page