Houthis

Mojtaba Khamenei says Trump’s signature is ‘worthless’ and that ‘bullying’ is a core element of US foreign policy.

Iran’s supreme leader has warned that the United States will suffer “unforgettable lessons” at the hands of Tehran and its regional allies, accusing the US of repeatedly violating the memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the two countries.

A written statement attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei was read out on state television on Saturday, in which the supreme leader said Washington’s breaches of last month’s MoU showed that President Donald Trump’s signature was “utterly worthless and invalid”.

“The repeated breach of agreements by the Great Satan vis-a-vis the accord has once again proven to all that the signature of the President of America is now utterly worthless and invalid, and that bullying, hegemonism and savagery are inseparable components of the American creed and doctrine,” the statement read.

“Now that the American enemy is seeking to foment war and suffer heavier costs and further humiliation, it should know that the dear nation of Iran and the Resistance Front hold unforgettable lessons for it,” it added.

The US dramatically escalated its attacks on Iran this week by targeting civilian infrastructure, including bridges, railway lines and water desalination plants.

Tehran has responded by successfully striking civilian infrastructure in Kuwait, with authorities there urging everyone to ration electricity.

The US-Israeli war on Iran, which began in February, is seen as existential by the country’s senior leadership.

Tehran has shown no sign of caving to the increasing demands from the Trump administration, as regional countries continue to push for an end to the conflict behind the scenes.

Khamenei said the US has “revealed its true face,” exposing its “deceitfulness, irrationality, unreliability and wickedness”.

He called on Iranians to trust the leadership to protect the country, urging people to remain “vigilant” and “active” as the fighting grinds on.

Reports have surfaced in recent days that the Houthis in Yemen could close the Bab al-Mandeb gateway to the Red Sea in support of their crucial ally Iran. That would further destabilise global energy markets, increase inflation and apply additional pressure on Trump to halt attacks.

The war is deeply unpopular in the US and has inflicted economic harm on Americans.

The MoU mediated by Qatar and Pakistan and signed last month aimed to create the conditions to bring the war to a permanent end.

However, Tehran and Washington have since declared the accord “over” after accusing each other of violating it.

In recent weeks, there have been renewed tensions in Yemen. Attacks by the Houthi group – which has controlled Sanaa and large parts of northern Yemen since 2014 – have coincided with controversy prompted by the arrival of an Iranian plane at Sanaa airport and renewed concern over navigation in the Red Sea.

This comes in the context of a stalled peace process and the failure to reach an agreement on de-escalation mechanisms.

In this climate, movements on the front lines appear to be an attempt by the Houthis to exert pressure and to test the limits of the response of the internationally recognised government, its ally, Saudi Arabia, and the international community at large.

So far, these developments do not point to a decision to launch a broad military confrontation, but they show that the truce announced in 2022 can no longer contain the conflict.

From Hays to Al-Jawf: Limited clashes and tribal mobilisation

The Hays district in Hodeidah governorate near the port of Hodeidah on the Red Sea has been one of the main flashpoints in recent weeks.

On July 5, Houthi rebels attacked government forces’ positions using mortar shells, drones and sniper fire. According to medical and military sources cited by Al Jazeera, 16 government soldiers were killed in the attack and 22 others were wounded. The Houthis did not announce their casualty toll or provide a detailed account of how the clashes began.

Hays is of particular importance because it has remained relatively calm since the truce, and because its location is close to the coast and shipping lanes.

The tensions are not confined to Hodeidah. Marib, Taiz and al-Dhale have also witnessed varying levels of military mobilisation.

In al-Jawf, the picture is different. A tribal disturbance was triggered by a dispute over a house in Sanaa and then turned into a test of the Houthis’ influence and their relationship with the tribes. Sheikh Hamad bin Rashid bin Fadgham al-Hazmi intervened in the dispute, per tribal custom, but was detained by the Houthis.

This turned discontent into an anti-Houthi tribal movement, which is accompanied by calls for a “tribal nakaf”, a traditional call for mobilisation and support, alongside the “al-Rayyan sit-ins”, temporary tribal gatherings to rally supporters.

This development points to how developments in the battlefield are causing tensions in the tribal and social sphere.

Al-Jawf lies near Marib and within a sensitive military and tribal zone, and any prolonged unrest there could open an additional pressure front on the Houthis and complicate their calculations in one of the most important fronts of Yemen’s northeast.

Tensions have also extended to the Red Sea. On July 5, the British military said that a cargo ship had come under attack off the coast of Hodeidah, which did not result in any injuries. No one claimed responsibility, but the incident took place near an area under Houthi control and at a time when the group has renewed its threats regarding navigation.

The attack highlights the continuing risks ships face in transiting in the vicinity of Hodeidah and Bab al-Mandab, one of the world’s busiest straits.

Sanaa airport tensions and a frozen prisoner exchange deal

Tensions between Yemen’s internationally recognised government and the Houthis havе not been confined to the battlefield. On July 3, an Iranian aircraft arrived at Sanaa airport to pick up a Houthi delegation to attend the funeral of the late Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

A week later, the internationally recognised government announced that Iran had submitted a request to operate a Mahan Air flight from Tehran to Sanaa to return the Houthi delegation. It rejected the request and proposed returning the individuals on an aircraft chartered by Yemenia Airways.

In response, some Houthi leaders insisted on the continuation of Mahan Air flights to Sanaa, presenting them as part of their right to operate the airport and open direct routes with the outside world. Thus, the dispute went beyond a single flight to the issue of managing an international airport and airspace outside government institutions, and the resulting struggle over sovereignty and de facto recognition of Houthi authority over the entry point.

Saudi Arabia is also affected by the dispute. The operation of a direct route between Sanaa and Tehran would affect the security and political arrangements that accompanied the reopening of the airport during the truce. Riyadh views the expansion of airport traffic outside an agreement as a factor that strengthens the Houthis’ relationship with Iran near the kingdom’s southern border. Therefore, its position is linked to keeping flights within declared arrangements while continuing to operate the national carrier.

Another issue that has heated up in the past few days is a long-negotiated prisoner and detainee exchange deal, which has stalled.

On July 10, Hadi Haig, head of the government negotiating team on the prisoners and abductees file, announced that the team had received notification from the International Committee of the Red Cross and the office of the United Nations envoy that the Houthis have refused to implement the agreement on its scheduled date and have postponed it indefinitely.

In response, the head of the Houthis’ Prisoners Affairs Committee, Abdulqader al-Murtada, blamed the government side for the delay, accusing it of failing to abide by the terms of the agreement and of refusing to add names to the agreed list.

The deal includes more than 1,600 detainees and requires field arrangements and an air bridge under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Regardless of each side’s responsibility, the postponement places the negotiation track before a new test and confirms the continued use of humanitarian files as tools of political and military pressure.

Regional tension and the limits of confrontation

Regional developments have directly impacted Yemen. The US-Israel war on Iran and tensions between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia have reduced the ability of Yemeni parties to control escalation and increased the influence of external calculations on the course of the conflict.

This has given the Houthis greater room for political and military manoeuvre, while the government has struggled to assert its sovereign presence.

Saudi Arabia wants to contain the Houthi threat while preserving the gains of de-escalation. The Houthis, for their part, are betting on combining military action with pressure over the airport, prisoners, and navigation files to extract broader recognition of their authority and their direct relationship with Iran.

These developments reflect the fragility of the de-escalation process and the growing political and military pressures.

Limited clashes and mobilisation are likely to continue, with each side using the leverage it possesses to apply pressure. So far, there is no evidence of a decision to engage in a full-scale confrontation, but repeated attacks and faltering negotiations could end the state of relative calm that has persisted since 2022.

The risk of confrontation will remain as long as the root causes of the war remain unresolved, and as long as the parties use weapons to impose their vision and improve their political fortunes.

Yemeni government officials say the Houthis launched a surprise offensive targeting army barracks in southern Hodeidah as fighting intensifies across western Yemen.
The renewed clashes come as both sides seek to regain territory and strengthen control over the strategic Red Sea coast.

BEIRUT — Israel and Iran traded fire on Monday, all but derailing a brittle two-month ceasefire that had largely stopped the fighting in the U.S and Israel’s assault on Iran.

The tit-for-tat attacks between the two sides threaten to widen the scope of a conflict that has already killed and wounded thousands, displaced more than a million people and rattled economies across the globe — even while embroiling the U.S. in a war with no clear off-ramp.

“Israel and Iran must immediately stop ‘shooting.’ ” wrote President Trump early Monday on his social media platform, Truth Social.

Later, he wrote, “Both sides, Israel and Iran, are looking to do an immediate CEASEFIRE!”

“Final negotiations on ‘Peace’ are proceeding, subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way. The Blockade will remain in place, and in full force and effect, until a ‘Final Deal’ is reached. Things should move quickly.”

The latest escalation came after Israel attacked the suburbs of Lebanon’s capital Beirut on Sunday in what it said was a targeted strike against Hezbollah, an Iran-supported paramilitary faction and political party.

In recent days, Iran conditioned a ceasefire agreement with Israel and the U.S. on a cessation of hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon, threatening it would respond to any Israeli action on the Lebanese capital. Israel rejects linking both battlefields, and insists on having a free hand to attack Hezbollah.

A number of U.S.-brokered ceasefires between the Lebanese and Israeli governments — but without Hezbollah involvement — failed to stop most of the fighting, with Israeli warplanes pounding wide swaths of Lebanon’s south while Hezbollah launched drones and missiles on northern Israel. Nevertheless, the Lebanese government has rejected being included in Iran’s negotiations with the U.S.

By Sunday night, Iran’s threats came to pass with several waves of Iranian ballistic missiles, which caused no injuries and were the first Tehran had fired at Israel since a ceasefire took hold in April. Iran’s military said the fusillade was a warning. But Israel said it would retaliate.

President Trump initially downplayed the Iranian attack on Sunday, saying in an interview with the Financial Times Iran’s barrage was “not going to have any impact on the deal.”

“We’ll see how it ends up. But they [the Iranian strikes on Israel] were attacks that did not kick at all,” he said.

“The deal may make it on its own merit, or not, but this will not have any effect on it.”

Trump also told the Axios news site he would talk to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop him retaliating against Iran’s barrage.

He also told the Financial Times that Netanyahu “won’t have any choice” but to accept the deal Trump negotiates with Iran.

“I call the shots. I call all the shots. He [Netanyahu] doesn’t call the shots,” Trump said.

Yet by the early morning on Monday, dozens of Israeli warplanes were striking western and central Iran. They hit a petrochemical complex in Mahshahr in southwestern Iran, and waged extensive strikes on “strategic defense systems,” according to Israeli military statements, in what observers said was a prelude to a wider offensive. Residents in Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz and Shiraz reported powerful explosions.

The Israeli military said in a statement it expected several days of fighting with Iran but was prepared for a prolonged campaign. It said the strikes on Iran were conducted by Israel on its own, but that they had been done in “full coordination” with U.S. Central Command, which also helped in intercepting Iranian missiles launched at Israel.

But that distinction appeared to matter little to Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmail Baghaei, who said in a press conference on Monday that the U.S held direct responsibility for recent ceasefire violations and Israel’s action “cannot be looked at in isolation from the U.S.”

“No one believes the Israeli regime would take any action without coordination with the United States,” he said.

“The U.S. bears responsibility for the Israeli regime’s aggression, and it will also be responsible for the consequences of any escalation in tensions.”

Iran launched additional barrages throughout Monday, targeting Israeli airbases in Nevatim and Tel Nof and a petrochemical plant in Haifa, according to a statement from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps. It added Israel was engaging in “a dangerous game by targeting civilian and oil infrastructure — a game that will now encompass all regional energy targets, with global economic consequences resting on America.”

The renewed hostilities also saw Yemen’s Houthis — who receive support from Iran and Hezbollah, and are part of a regional network of Iran-backed factions — enter the fray with a pair of ballistic missiles lobbed at Israel. The Israeli military said one of the missiles was intercepted; the second fell short of Israel.

Houthi spokesman Brig. Gen. Yahya Sarea confirmed the attack in a televised statement on Monday, and said Israeli maritime navigation in the Red Sea would be targeted.

During the Gaza war, the Houthis attacked commercial shipping in the Red Sea — including ships with no link to Israel — to pressure Israel into lifting its blockade on the enclave.

But, unlike Hezbollah, which attacked Israel on March 2, three days after the U.S. and Israeli campaign on Iran, the Houthis had refrained from helping their ally, until Monday.

Their involvement now raises the specter of another squeeze on energy markets already beleaguered by closures on the Strait of Hormuz. Since the U.S.-Israeli assault, the Red Sea has acted as the main alternative conduit for energy supplies, especially for those from Saudi Arabia. If the Houthis closed the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, it would all but paralyze commercial flows.

Oil prices spiked in the wake of the exchanges, with Brent Crude rising 5% to hit $98 a barrel.