British report: Air strikes on Yemen are ineffective and counterproductive


The British website “UNHERD” stated that “the American-British attacks on Yemen backfired” and were like “stirring a hornet’s nest.”

The website indicated that the US-British attacks, which began on January 12, raised the rate of Yemeni attacks in the Red Sea from 0.38 per day before that date, to 0.53 after, according to a statistical report published by the website.

The website emphasized that the attacks – in addition to their lack of effect – provide the United States’ opponents, led by China and Iran, with intelligence information about Western maritime defense systems that could be used in any future conflict, which raises serious questions about the wisdom of military action.

The site asserted that the Yemenis have already achieved their goal of imposing an effective naval blockade in the region, attributing the reason why Western leaders continue to implement these strikes, despite their adverse effect, to what it called: the principle of “do something.”

The report explained that the “do something” principle results from a weak leadership class feeling the need to act when an enemy or competitor engages in provocation, even if these actions will lead to adverse results. Weak leaders are unable to make difficult decisions based on evidence and logic, and instead attack – albeit ineffectively – so that it appears as if they are tackling the problem.

The publication of the report comes in conjunctions with launching of five US-British new air raids on the Ras Isa area in the Al-Salif district northwest of the city of Hodeida.