The Republic of Yemen, the Houthi Terror Organization, and International Law

Paradoxically, despite its present hostile activity against Israel and international shipping, the historical territory called Yemen was purportedly the home to figures such as the Queen of Sheba, who brought a caravan of gifts for King Solomon.

In the third century CE, under the rule of the Himyarite Kingdom, Yemen was heavily influenced by Judaism, according to historians of the ancient Hebrew civilizations.¹ Several inscriptions have been found in Hebrew and Sabaean, which praised the ruling house in Jewish terms for “…helping and empowering the People of Israel.”²

Ancient history aside, today Yemen is an independent sovereign entity, a member of the UN, a party to the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and its 1977 Protocols constituting international humanitarian law, as well as a party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Despite signing the ICC Rome Statute, Yemen never ratified it and thus is not a member of the ICC and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Court.

Notwithstanding the internal political, religious, and military rivalries and ongoing crises and civil war within Yemen since 2011 and the more recent seizure of considerable swathes of territory by the Houthi terror insurgents, the Republic of Yemen remains an acknowledged, fully recognized sovereign state entity. It bears full state responsibility for any aggressive, offensive, and terrorist actions of the Houthis emanating from Yemen’s sovereign territory, whether directed at Israel or the international community in general.

In violation of its obligations under the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and other international commitments, Yemen’s ongoing aggressive military actions against Israel, including the repeated firing of rockets, long-range ballistic missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles targeting Israel’s civilian population, constitute a plethora of crimes: the crime of aggression, crimes against humanity and war crimes, in stark violation of the UN Charter, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Protocols as well as several international conventions and norms and principles of customary international law.

Such actions include bombarding and attacking another sovereign state in violation of its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence, intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population and civilian objects and installations.

In violation of international maritime law, and specifically, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which Yemen is a state party, Yemen has obstructed international shipping through the international strait of Bab El Mandeb and the Red Sea for more than a year.

It has aggressively impeded the inviolable rights of transit passage by international shipping through the strait and the Red Sea by offensively targeting vessels and their crew, to the extent of preventing passage to and from coastal ports bordering the sea.

Since 2011, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has adopted several resolutions seeking a solution to the civil war in Yemen. Since the commencement of the Houthi/Yemenite attacks on international shipping, these resolutions, some obligatory adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, have called, inter alia, for the imposition of sanctions on the Houthi leaders as well as an arms embargo.

In practice, the UNSC and its resolutions have been proven to be toothless tigers, totally ignored by the Yemenite Houthis and sidelined and minimized by the international community.

After years of inaction, and after the Houthis intensified their aggression against Israel and the international shipping routes, on December 18, 2023, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, announced a 20-state coalition to protect ships, under the name “Operation Prosperity Guardian” (OPG).

This was followed by an additional 44 states, including the members of NATO and the EU, which “condemned Houthi interference” with freedom of navigation and declared that such actions constitute a threat to maritime security.

In February 2024, the EU launched its defensive Red Sea operation, named ASPIDES.

While the OPG coalition now includes more than 20 states, not all of which have been publicly identified, the main focus of OPG and ASPIDES is to prevent the Houthi aggression against the shipping routes. The effort was also designed to minimize both the considerable financial damage caused to Egypt and the additional transportation costs to the Western markets. As of July 2024, revenue registered by the Suez Canal for fiscal year 2023/24 fell by more than $2 billion.

Shamefully, but not surprisingly, the prevention of the Yemenite-Houthi aggression against Israel and its civilian population was not one of the openly stated goals of either OPG or APIDES.

The message of the international community to the Houthi/Yemenite terrorists appears to be clear: Attack Israel at will, just don’t do anything that causes the international community and especially Egypt, any extra financial expense or a loss due to impedance of international shipping.

By turning a blind eye to such aggressive activity over 18 months, the international community is, in effect, shamelessly indicating to the Houthi terror organization presently ruling Yemen, that it remains indifferent and apathetic to the illegal acts of aggression, crimes against humanity, and war crimes emanating from Yemen’s territory.

The message to the Houthi terrorists is that they enjoy an evident carte blanche to blatantly and openly violate international law, without any fear of international response or reprisal.

Despite the rhetoric of the UNSC and the international coalitions against the threat that terrorism poses to global security, time and time again, the Iranian-backed terror against Israel is constantly excluded.

This Iranian-backed Yemenite-Houthi terror presents yet another example of the irrelevance and ineffectiveness of contemporary international law, as well as the apathetic and hesitant UN activity, when it comes to dealing with terror, especially when directed against Israel.

While the Western world continues to adhere to accepted, and often archaic diplomatic and political rules, the terrorists – Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Houthis – openly, and brazenly, flout international law, at the bidding, encouragement, and support of Iran.

Rather than enhancing international pressure on the terrorists through the adoption of necessary proactive and collective measures to put a stop to their aggression, the world appears to prefer to focus on threatening and condemning democratic and law-abiding Israel for having the gall to actively defend itself.

This is shameful!

* * *

Notes