Follow us on social

Shutterstock_2082946732

Occupied Yemeni island could host part of US-led missile defense system

Critics say the proposal is hypocritical given Washington’s opposition to taking territory through force in places like Ukraine.

Analysis | Reporting | Middle East

There's no place on Earth like Socotra. With its dragon's blood trees and white sandy beaches, the Yemeni island looks like it was pulled straight from a sequel to James Cameron’s Avatar. But the island's unique ecology is threatened by another of its quirks: it is situated squarely at the mouth of the Gulf of Aden, through which ships bound for the West must pass on their way to the Suez Canal.

As Yemen’s civil war raged, the United Arab Emirates arrived on Socotra in 2015 and, despite protests from nearly all warring factions, have slowly expanded their influence since. Today, calls to the island are made using the UAE's country code, and tourists fly from Abu Dhabi without a Yemeni visa — a situation that some argue amounts to annexation.

The Emiratis have also established a military presence on Socotra. And, according to a recent article in Breaking Defense, they are considering expanding that presence by putting missile defense sensors on the island, which would support a nascent, U.S.-led alliance made up of Israel and several Arab states.

Critics of this proposal worry that increased militarization of Socotra would entrench Abu Dhabi's influence in the archipelago and damage its local wildlife, much of which cannot be found anywhere else. They also argue that U.S. endorsement of such a move would contradict the position that it is illegal to take territory in war, a stance that underpins the West’s response to Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

“It just makes any work that [U.S. officials] do about Ukraine seem not honest and not true,” said Aisha Jumaan of the Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation. “Whatever reasons that they are saying in response to the Russian aggression against Ukraine just seems one-sided.”

Jumaan contends that this contradictory stance led to the international split over how to deal with the war in Ukraine. “A lot of countries in the world actually are not supporting the U.S. position because they see that the U.S. picks and chooses the causes that it wants to support,” she said. 

Some experts also invoke Western Sahara, a territory that nearly all of the international community says is illegally occupied by Morocco. The United States held that position until President Donald Trump recognized Rabat’s rule over the region as legitimate, a move widely seen as a sweetener for Moroccan normalization with Israel.

As Peter Beinart pointed out in the Guardian, Biden has maintained this policy toward Western Sahara despite opposition from advocates of international law and human rights. “The Biden administration has also boosted arms sales to Morocco even though the US-based democracy watchdog Freedom House reports that people in Western Sahara enjoy fewer freedoms than people in China or Iran,” Beinart wrote.

The White House declined to comment on the story. Responsible Statecraft also reached out to the UAE’s embassy in Washington, D.C., the Department of Defense, and four members of Congress who support the idea of a Middle East air defense alliance, none of whom responded.

Abu Dhabi first began to militarize Socotra around 2018, when it established a military base on the island. The move came with the imprimatur of the Southern Transitional Council, a UAE-backed faction that seeks independence for South Yemen.

This policy also earned implicit support from the United States. Unlike Yemen’s internationally recognized government, Washington has never condemned Abu Dhabi’s presence on the island, and the U.S. continues to sell billions of dollars worth of weapons to the UAE.

And concerns about the proposed missile sensors go beyond international law. Experts worry the growing military alignment could inflame tensions with Iran and damage chances for diplomacy between Tehran and its Arab counterparts. And former intelligence officer Paul Pillar recently argued in Responsible Statecraft that such a security agreement “would risk dragging the United States into conflicts that stem from the ambitions and objectives of regional players and not from U.S. national interests.”

Some also wonder whether the placement makes strategic sense when it comes to countering Iranian missiles. “[T]here are other locations inside Yemen that can best serve this purpose since drones are launched from mainland Yemen toward Riyadh,” said Fernando Carvajal, a former member of the UN’s Yemen Panel of Experts, in an email to Responsible Statecraft.

As Carvajal noted, the people of Socotra largely do not consider the island to be occupied. This situation is in some ways similar to Russia’s de facto annexation of Crimea prior to the current war, which earned some praise among the region’s residents despite its illegality under international law. And this local ambivalence will no doubt complicate any talks aimed at ending the war in Yemen and returning Socotra to Sanaa’s control.

But what is clear is that Abu Dhabi has significant influence over the archipelago and little interest in changing that anytime soon. Highlighting this influence, Jumaan pointed to a recent tweet from Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a prominent Emirati academic considered close to the UAE’s rulers. “Good morning from Socotra,” Abdulla wrote under a picture of him in flip flops on a beach. “Some of the wonderful people I’ve talked to here hope [the island] becomes the eighth emirate of the UAE.”

“It's just so blatant,” Jumaan said. “Without the U.S. this would not be possible.”


Dragon's blood trees on Socotra Island. (Shutterstock/ Zaruba Ondrej)
Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
Iran
Top image credit: An Iranian man (not pictured) carries a portrait of the former commander of the IRGC Aerospace Forces, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, and participates in a funeral for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, Iranian nuclear scientists, and civilians who are killed in Israeli attacks, in Tehran, Iran, on June 28, 2025, during the Iran-Israel ceasefire. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto VIA REUTERS)

First it was regime change, now they want to break Iran apart

Middle East

Washington’s foreign policy establishment has a dangerous tendency to dismantle nations it deems adversarial. Now, neoconservative think tanks like the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and their fellow travelers in the European Parliament are openly promoting the balkanization of Iran — a reckless strategy that would further destabilize the Middle East, trigger catastrophic humanitarian crises, and provoke fierce resistance from both Iranians and U.S. partners.

As Israel and Iran exchanged blows in mid-June, FDD’s Brenda Shaffer argued that Iran’s multi-ethnic makeup was a vulnerability to be exploited. Shaffer has been a vocal advocate for Azerbaijan in mainstream U.S. media, even as she has consistently failed to disclose her ties to Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR. For years, she has pushed for Iran’s fragmentation along ethnic lines, akin to the former Yugoslavia’s collapse. She has focused much of that effort on promoting the secession of Iranian Azerbaijan, where Azeris form Iran’s largest non-Persian group.

keep readingShow less
Ratcliffe Gabbard
Top image credit: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe join a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and his intelligence team in the Situation Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025. The White House/Handout via REUTERS

Trump's use and misuse of Iran intel

Middle East

President Donald Trump has twice, within the space of a week, been at odds with U.S. intelligence agencies on issues involving Iran’s nuclear program. In each instance, Trump was pushing his preferred narrative, but the substantive differences in the two cases were in opposite directions.

Before the United States joined Israel’s attack on Iran, Trump dismissed earlier testimony by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, in which she presented the intelligence community’s judgment that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Questioned about this testimony, Trump said, “she’s wrong.”

keep readingShow less
Mohammad Bin Salman Trump Ayatollah Khomenei
Top photo credit: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (President of the Russian Federation/Wikimedia Commons); U.S. President Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr) and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei (Wikimedia Commons)

Let's make a deal: Enrichment path that both Iran, US can agree on

Middle East

The recent conflict, a direct confrontation that pitted Iran against Israel and drew in U.S. B-2 bombers, has likely rendered the previous diplomatic playbook for Tehran's nuclear program obsolete.

The zero-sum debates concerning uranium enrichment that once defined that framework now represent an increasingly unworkable approach.

Although a regional nuclear consortium had been previously advanced as a theoretical alternative, the collapse of talks as a result of military action against Iran now positions it as the most compelling path forward for all parties.

Before the war, Iran was already suggesting a joint uranium enrichment facility with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Iranian soil. For Iran, this framework could achieve its primary goal: the preservation of a domestic nuclear program and, crucially, its demand to maintain some enrichment on its own territory. The added benefit is that it embeds Iran within a regional security architecture that provides a buffer against unilateral attack.

For Gulf actors, it offers unprecedented transparency and a degree of control over their rival-turned-friend’s nuclear activities, a far better outcome than a possible covert Iranian breakout. For a Trump administration focused on deals, it offers a tangible, multilateral framework that can be sold as a blueprint for regional stability.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.