By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following an attack by the Houthis near Yemen, ten people have been rescued from the Red Sea, while several others are believed to be held captive by the rebel group. The Houthis claimed responsibility for the attack on the commercial bulk carrier Eternity C, which resulted in three fatalities and the sinking of the ship. The crew consisted of 21 Filipinos, one Russian, and a three-person security team, with the Houthis asserting they targeted the vessel due to its alleged destination of the Israeli port of Eilat. This attack marks the second sinking this week, fueling concerns of a shipping crisis on a crucial trade route, as the Houthis vow to continue targeting ships with alleged ties to Israel until the conflict in Gaza ends.
Read the original article here
10 rescued, 4 killed, and others ‘kidnapped’ after Houthis sink ship in second Red Sea attack in a week; this paints a grim picture, doesn’t it? It’s a stark reminder of the escalating conflict and the devastating consequences for innocent people caught in the crossfire. The Houthis, a group asserting control in Yemen, are reportedly responsible for sinking a ship in the Red Sea, an act that has resulted in loss of life, the rescue of some, and the alleged abduction of others. It’s a situation that highlights the extreme risks involved in the maritime trade routes that are vital to global commerce.
The Houthis themselves claim they “completely sunk” the ship, further emphasizing the severity of their actions. They also claim to have rescued some of the crew, providing medical care before moving them to an undisclosed location. While the rescue efforts are certainly commendable, the act of taking the rescued crew to an undisclosed location raises serious concerns about their safety and well-being. It’s easy to understand the frustration and fear generated by this situation, especially for those who work on these ships.
This pattern of attacks raises serious questions about how to protect the global supply chains. Some suggest that the US and Israel, perhaps working together, could resolve the issue. They argue that a strategy akin to how the US handled ISIS, utilizing local forces with air support, might be effective. A key element of such a strategy could involve the UAE-backed Yemeni forces, who are reportedly organizing for action but require air support. This is, of course, easier said than done, as it involves intricate political maneuvering and the willingness of various nations to get involved. The current administration’s lack of political will, as one viewpoint asserts, and the perception of the Red Sea crisis being more of a European problem adds further complexities.
A more aggressive solution may involve targeting Iran, the alleged source of the Houthis’ weaponry. However, this brings with it the risk of a “hot war,” and one that could also result in significant loss of life. The economic considerations are also worth noting, as Egypt is heavily impacted by the disruption to shipping through the Suez Canal, potentially losing billions in transit fees. While some dismiss the economic impact, pointing out that trade routes have adjusted, the cumulative effects are still considerable. The prospect of military intervention is further complicated by the reluctance of various nations to act, as well as the inherent challenges and costs associated with such operations.
The potential role of Israel is also discussed. It’s suggested that if Israel were able to establish an air base in Somaliland, this could cripple the Houthis. However, the costs associated with such campaigns are huge, with the financial burden and who would fund such operations being key considerations. Moreover, any solution would have to confront complex geopolitical dynamics. The situation highlights the complexities of international alliances and the challenges of forging a united front.
There is a wide range of proposed responses. Some argue for a complete air war against the Houthis. Others question whether such an operation would be sustainable, and would require a significant, and costly, investment. The issue of who would pay for it is also key. The need for a coordinated approach is clear.
The article emphasizes that this is not just an Israeli problem. In that respect, Israel could be offering a clear security service that other nations benefit from as well. Therefore, they should also contribute financially or in other ways, if they mutually agree. The complexity of international relations and the various interests at play make any easy solution extremely difficult to achieve. While there is no shortage of opinions on what should be done, the human cost of this conflict, as evidenced by the sinking of this ship and the fate of its crew, must remain the priority.