Follow us on social

google cta
DoD denies using occupied Yemeni island to fight Houthis

DoD denies using occupied Yemeni island to fight Houthis

Putting American soldiers on Socotra would be a ‘flagrant breach of Yemen’s sovereignty,’ said one expert

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

The Department of Defense is denying a report that the U.S. is sending military reinforcements and missile defense batteries to the Yemeni island of Socotra, which sits near the mouth of the Red Sea, in order to help fend off Houthi attacks.

“[T]here are no U.S. forces present on Socotra,” a Pentagon spokesperson told RS.

Sky News Arabia first reported last week that U.S. officials chose to place troops on Socotra due to Saudi restrictions on the use of its airspace or territory to conduct attacks on the Houthis, who fought a Saudi- and Emirati-led coalition from 2015 until they reached an uneasy truce in early 2022.

Saudi Arabia has also forbidden American forces from using missile defense batteries placed in Saudi territory to fend off Houthi attacks, according to the Sky News Arabia report, which relies on an unnamed U.S. official. RS could not independently verify Sky News Arabia’s reporting.

If true, the presence of U.S. forces on Socotra would raise significant legal questions given that the United Arab Emirates, alongside Yemeni separatists, have quietly taken over the island in recent years in apparent violation of Yemeni sovereignty. Today, the UAE militarily occupies the island known for its otherworldly landscapes, which Emirati citizens can now visit without a visa.

An American presence on Socotra would be “a flagrant breach of Yemen’s sovereignty,” according to Sarah Leah Whitson, the executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN). By placing American soldiers on occupied territory, the Biden administration “undermines the credibility of America's condemnation of Russia’s illegal occupation of Ukrainian territory,” Whitson argued.

“Biden’s understanding of the 'rules based-order' appears to amount to ‘do as I say, not as I do,’” she told RS.

The Socotra claim raises questions about how the U.S. is seeking to thwart Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping, which the Houthis say are a response to Israel’s war on Hamas in Gaza, which has now left more than 32,000 Palestinians dead, mostly civilians. The U.S. has mounted a months-long campaign to degrade the armed group’s capabilities but has so far failed to restore calm in the strategic waterway, which leads to the Suez Canal.

The length and scale of operations against the Houthis have raised concerns among legal experts, who argue that the White House must seek congressional authorization for its military campaign. Some military analysts also worry that American attacks risk further inflaming tensions in the Middle East.

“[I]t should now be obvious there is no credible military solution to the crisis in the Red Sea,” wrote Michael DiMino, a fellow at Defense Priorities, in RS. U.S. bombings create “a non-trivial risk of regional war that can only be ignored at the world’s peril,” DiMino argued.

Sky News Arabia’s use of the term “reinforcements” suggests that the Pentagon may have previously sent soldiers to Socotra without public knowledge. In 2022, reports claimed that the U.S. government was considering Socotra as a location for missile defense sensors to support American troops and their allies in the region. It is not clear if those reported talks are related to the recent move.

A Houthi spokesperson said the Socotra news is evidence of the “effectiveness of Yemeni attacks in the direction of the Indian Ocean,” according to Al-Quds Al-Arabi. The group, which has largely won the Yemeni civil war but is not part of the internationally recognized government, also described the reported U.S. presence as “illegal.”

The Sky News Arabia report highlights the complexity of creating a united front to military thwart Houthi attacks. While Saudi Arabia and the UAE once welcomed U.S. support in fighting the armed group, regional powers are now determined to prevent a reignition of the Yemen conflict and wary of appearing to side with Israel and the U.S. against the Palestinians. These factors help explain why the U.S. has struggled to build regional backing, at least in public, for its Red Sea efforts.


Dragon's blood trees on Socotra Island. (Shutterstock/ Zaruba Ondrej)
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)
Top photo credit: President Cyril Ramaphosa (Photo: GCIS/Flickr) and Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)

Africa

South Africa is struggling to unfurl its wings as a leading middle power and advance its relations with its fellow BRICS members while keeping out of the cross hairs of the U.S. president. This has been particularly hard considering that one member of the Global South grouping — Iran — is on Donald Trump’s current list of potential military targets.

South Africa joined BRICS in 2006. The organization is supposed to serve as an intergovernmental forum for member countries to connect on issues related to diplomacy, security, and economics. But the bloc has angered President Trump, who sees it as a threat to American leadership, particularly given China’s membership in the group.

keep readingShow less
Trump Khamanei
Top image credit: Bella1105/shutterstock.com

Could Trump bomb Iran before settling on a rationale?

Middle East

Shifting justifications for a war are never a good sign, and they strongly suggest that the war in question was not warranted.

In the Vietnam War, the principal public rationale of saving South Vietnam from communism got replaced in the minds of the warmakers — especially after losing hope of winning the contest in Vietnam — by the belief that the United States had to keep fighting to preserve its credibility. In the Iraq War, when President George W. Bush’s prewar argument about weapons of mass destruction fell apart, he shifted to a rationale centered on bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq.

keep readingShow less
James Holtsnider
Top image credit: James Holtsnider, U.S. President Donald Trump's nominee to be ambassador to Jordan, testifies before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on nominations on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

New US ambassador's charm offensive is backfiring in Jordan

Middle East

Since arriving in Amman around three months ago to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Jordan, James Holtsnider quickly became one of the highest-profile envoys in the Hashemite Kingdom. In addition to presenting his credentials to King Abdullah II, Holtsnider has met with Jordanian soccer players, attended weddings, and joined tribal gatherings.

However, a January 14 request by a U.S. Embassy delegation for the ambassador to offer condolences at the family home of former Karak mayor Abdullah Al-Dmour showed that many Jordanians have little interest in participating in Holtsnider’s public relations initiative. Dmour’s relatives rejected the U.S. ambassador’s wish to visit. Dmour’s tribe issued a statement noting Holtsnider’s request “violates Jordanian tribal customs, which separates the sanctity of mourning from any political presence with public implications.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.