March 18, 2025
Nasser Kandil
• The American war on Ansar Allah and Yemen goes beyond its stated objectives, including serving the U.S. alliance with the occupying entity at a critical moment following sixteen months of war. During this period, the occupying entity failed to crush the resistance movements despite inflicting significant damage. This war also extends beyond American claims about its connection to future U.S.-Iran negotiations or the possibility of American and Israeli military strikes on Iran. Instead, the battle for the Red Sea emerges as the most crucial aspect of this American war, shaping the world’s geopolitical landscape at a historic juncture – one that cannot be separated from the final stages of redrawing global maps. This becomes evident when considering Washington’s urgent efforts to reach an understanding with Russia to end the Ukraine war based on political, economic, and military balances tied to Europe’s geopolitical order.
• A glance at the map reveals an implicit axis stretching across the Red Sea to the Dardanelles, the Bosporus, and the Black Sea, dividing the world into two vast blocs. One consists of Asia alone, while the other encompasses Europe, Africa, America, and Australia. With Russia, China, India, and Iran firmly positioned within the first bloc, the U.S. seeks to lead and control the second. However, such dominance seems unattainable without securing control over the Red Sea, which, as the U.S. Department of Defense acknowledges in its annual national security reports, remains the world’s most vital maritime passage. This significance stems not only from the sheer volume of global trade passing through it but also from its role as a lifeline for global energy networks. For a nation fundamentally built as a naval power, possessing a fleet unmatched in scale, control over this waterway is critical to maintaining its global influence.
• When the occupying entity’s leaders considered the region’s potential conflicts, their eyes turned to the Red Sea, recalling the strategic role of Bab al-Mandab in the 1973 war. Their hopes rested on two assumptions: first, neutralising Egypt and Saudi Arabia from playing a role similar to that of 1973, and second, securing decisive American intervention to prevent resistance allies from leveraging the Red Sea. Yet neither the Americans nor the Israelis anticipated what actually unfolded,Yemen’s successful assertion of its will over the Red Sea for sixteen consecutive months, defying overwhelming U.S. military power.
• Now, before the war in Gaza concludes and before the final contours of any agreement are drawn, Washington is scrambling to erase the war’s repercussions on the Red Sea, redefine the region’s strategic balance, and reclaim its decisive influence. This urgency has driven the U.S. to pursue its objectives with reckless determination, just as Israel does in its confrontations with the resistance in Lebanon and Gaza. Yet these are existential wars, where surrendering to unfavorable outcomes is unthinkable before exhausting every means to reimpose dominance. The core challenge facing the U.S. mirrors that of Israel: escalating destruction and a greater reliance on firepower will not alter the fundamental strategic dynamics. The popular bases of resistance in Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen share an unyielding bond with their leaderships, viewing resistance as an existential choice and sacrifice as the necessary price for dignity. Any assumption that their resolve can be broken, whether by increasing military pressure or inflicting greater suffering, has been repeatedly disproven throughout history, most notably in Gaza and Lebanon, where mass killing and destruction failed to force surrender. The leadership remains steadfast, confident in its capabilities, and prepared for the worst.
• Washington’s actions, like those of Tel Aviv, may seem inevitable. Yet, their ultimate failure appears just as certain. This means that, through resilience, patience, and persistence, the resistance movements are now actively shaping the world’s geopolitical order, leveraging the strategic significance of Gaza, South Lebanon, and, above all, the Red Sea.
