Yemeni Operations to Support Gaza (2-2): Tactical Effectiveness and Lessons Learned

Last updated May 31, 2025

Ansar Allah Website | Report by Ali Al-Darwani

Since the outbreak of the Israeli aggression on Gaza in October 2023, Yemen has taken an unprecedented stance in modern Arab history, expanding the concept of “supporting the resistance” from political rhetoric to direct military engagement. This shift manifested through targeting Israeli maritime navigation in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Over time, Yemen’s position became a central element in the regional equation—establishing itself as a maritime actor capable of disrupting Western alliances and exposing their vulnerabilities.

Yemen’s Naval Strategy: From Defense to Offense

Sanaa explicitly announced its military support for the Palestinian resistance by preventing vessels linked to the Israeli entity from transiting the Red Sea. In practice, this move effectively closed Israel’s port at Umm al-Rashrash (Eilat), depriving the Zionist enemy of a critical seaport. Far from being merely symbolic, these actions had direct economic repercussions on Israeli trade and turned the Red Sea into an open battlefield.

These operations were not demonstrations of force for show, but rather a series of precise attacks employing anti-ship missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and even explosive boats—replicating asymmetric warfare tactics that have proven effective against heavily armed naval fleets.

Confrontation with the U.S. Navy

When the United States, joined by the United Kingdom and several European nations, formed a naval coalition to counter the Yemeni threat, they expected a brief, decisive confrontation that would swiftly suppress what they labeled the “Yemeni insurrection.” What followed was quite the opposite: Washington and its allies found themselves embroiled in the longest irregular naval engagement since roughly World War II, lasting more than a year and a half.

Yemeni forces launched a series of specialized operations against U.S. naval vessels and even dared to attack American aircraft carriers in the Red Sea—an unprecedented event in decades. This demonstrated Yemen’s rise as an actor capable of shattering the aura of invincibility surrounding U.S. naval power at one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints.

While European states tried to project the image of robust allies, most European warships withdrew from the Red Sea in the initial months of the confrontation, after their defensive capabilities proved inadequate against Yemeni assaults. Their retreat was not merely a tactical repositioning but a vivid revelation of Western military fragility when faced with an unconventional war waged from a resource-poor coastal region, yet driven by steadfast resolve and military ingenuity.

Major Turning Points: Western Naval Vulnerabilities Exposed

The conflict laid bare the fact that technological superiority alone does not guarantee victory in contemporary warfare—especially when pitted against opponents with strong willpower and appropriate tactics. Western vessels endured repeated attacks without achieving decisive deterrence, highlighting the weaknesses of their maritime defense systems against precise missiles and effective UAV strikes.

The performance of the U.S. Navy was no better than that of the European navies that intervened in the Red Sea. European warships deliberately kept a distance from their U.S. counterparts under the banner of the “Operation Aspides” coalition, but the naval battle still exposed their vulnerabilities. One by one, European ships withdrew under relentless Yemeni fire that a French frigate commander described as “unprecedented in scale.” Several European warships were directly targeted, revealing deficiencies in their defensive capabilities:

French Frigate “Aquitaine”: Subjected to attacks by Yemeni drones and missiles, it withdrew from the region after 71 days due to dwindling ammunition and defenses, as confirmed by its commander, Captain Jérôme Henry, in an interview with Le Figaro. He stated that the French Navy had never faced such a level of armament and violence, emphasizing that the threat they encountered in the Red Sea was far greater than anticipated.
Danish Frigate “Iver Huitfeldt”: Its withdrawal followed a serious operational fiasco: during a Yemeni drone attack, its defensive systems malfunctioned and its countermeasure munitions detonated prematurely, endangering the crew. The Danish Defense Minister subsequently dismissed the Chief of Defense for failing to report this critical failure.
British Destroyer HMS Diamond (Type 45): Deployed alongside the U.S. Navy from December 2023 to July 2024 as part of Operation Prosperity Guardian, it ultimately departed for Gibraltar for maintenance and resupply before leaving the theater completely in July 2024. Western reports attributed this to “logistical challenges in such a high-threat environment,” a clear indication of the vessel’s inability to withstand sustained Yemeni fire.
German Frigate “Hessen”: The second ship to withdraw from the Red Sea after sustaining similar attacks, underscoring the significant difficulties Western navies faced in countering unconventional threats.

In response to the departure of the British destroyer Diamond—followed by the Danish frigate Iver Huitfeldt—Muhammad Ali al-Houthi, a member of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, declared:

“After the British destroyer ‘The White’ departed the Red Sea, the Danish frigate ‘The Cream’ also withdrew, leaving the Red Sea’s history as a testament to the tyranny of the arrogant states against Gaza and a record of our Armed Forces’ steadfast support—etched in the hearts of the free—as bright achievements, God willing.”

U.S. Ceasefire and Yemen’s Elevated Status

In an unexpected turn, the United States announced a ceasefire with Yemen in 2025 after failing to achieve military deterrence and amid increasing domestic pressure to end its drain in the Red Sea and avoid entanglement in a prolonged conflict. This declaration was not merely the close of a chapter in hostilities but an implicit acknowledgment of Yemen’s newfound standing as an influential maritime power—capable of setting terms on regional security matters and reshaping the balance of influence across the Horn of Africa and global energy routes.

According to multiple reports, indirect negotiations preceding the ceasefire saw Yemen’s demands include easing the blockade on Yemen, guarantees for unimpeded Yemeni navigation, and the removal of Ansar Allah from terror lists. As a result, the truce announcement represented a diplomatic victory equal to a military one.

Days after President Trump declared the ceasefire, his Vice President, J.D. Vance, addressed a naval academy graduation ceremony and explicitly proclaimed the “end of American hegemony,” referencing the naval confrontation with Yemen’s armed forces. In commentary, The Hill newspaper in Washington noted that the Yemen–U.S. ceasefire is viewed more broadly as the exhaustion of the U.S. Navy rather than genuine peace, pointing out that over one billion dollars were squandered with no tangible strategic gains. The article asserted that Trump—ever the proponent of “America First”—recognized that the returns on military investment in Yemen were nonexistent. It concluded that not only had the U.S. campaign failed to neutralize the “Houthis,” but it may even have bolstered their regional and symbolic stature.

Yemen’s Growing Naval Power: From Siege to Prestige

Despite enduring a decades-long blockade and aggressive war since 2015, Yemen has developed qualitative naval capabilities rooted in electronic surveillance, cyber warfare, and precision strikes. These competencies transformed Yemen from a “beleaguered state” into a “formidable force” in safeguarding international waterways. Once encircled a decade ago, Yemen now commands significant influence in the Red Sea and constitutes a crucial player in global maritime security calculations. By projecting naval pressure in support of Gaza, Yemen achieved not only symbolic solidarity but also altered the region’s geopolitical landscape.

Yemen’s success in posing genuine challenges to Western naval powers has elevated its regional standing—emerging as a key actor in international maritime navigation security. Yemen’s active role in backing Gaza weakened the United States’ efforts to forge a regional coalition including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt (the latter refused to join the “Prosperity Guardian” coalition). Similarly, European nations chose to stay out of the U.S.-U.K. intervention, instead forming their own alliance and adopting a less confrontational posture. Whenever European ships engaged with Yemeni forces, they perceived the risk and withdrew, resulting in a Red Sea devoid of European naval presence.

In sum, what began as operations of solidarity with Palestine repeatedly culminated in global acknowledgment of Yemen’s emergence as a maritime power. Sanaa has moved from the margins to the negotiating table—on Yemen’s terms.