Middle East

Thousands take to the streets in support of Houthis in Sanaa, Trump extends sanctions on Iran.

The war in Yemen intensifies with mounting clashes and reciprocal attacks between Saudi forces and the Houthis.

Yemen’s Houthi rebels have said Saudi Arabia carried out 26 strikes against areas under the group’s control in the past 24 hours, as the two sides continue trading attacks amid an escalating war in Yemen, according to the AFP news agency.

On Friday, the group claimed Saudi strikes on Houthi-held territory had reached 300 over the past week alone, hitting positions across the areas it controls, AFP reported.

Yemen’s government, backed by Saudi Arabia, said on Friday its forces had killed 30 Houthi rebels and wounded more than 60 in clashes in the al-Wazi’iyah district of Taiz province, one of several fronts where combat has picked up this week.

The exchange has come on the heels of a widening escalation of fighting in Yemen between the government’s military and the Houthi fighters.

Tens of thousands marched through Sanaa on Friday in a show of support for the Iran-backed Houthis and against Saudi Arabia, as the rebels press gains that have brought large stretches of Yemen’s Red Sea coast, including the strategic Bab al-Mandeb Strait, under their control.

Earlier this week, the intensifying attacks between the Yemeni government and the Houthi rebels killed at least five people, including three children, according to reports from both sides.

Saudi Arabia said one person was killed in the Taif governorate after a Houthi drone was intercepted, while Houthi-linked media reported deaths from Saudi strikes in Taiz and the town of Abs.

The escalation has drawn in Washington, though reluctantly.

US officials met Houthi representatives at the US embassy in the Omani capital, Muscat, over the weekend after the group’s rapid territorial gains raised concern over shipping through Bab al-Mandeb, a vital corridor for global trade.

The Houthis reportedly assured Washington that vessels not linked to Saudi Arabia would not be targeted.

Despite appeals from Riyadh for US President Donald Trump to strike the Houthis directly, Washington has so far held back, wary of opening a new front while still fighting a costly war with Iran.

Meanwhile, European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on Friday the bloc’s Red Sea naval mission, Operation Aspides, had raised its alert level as the situation in the region worsened, the Reuters news agency reported.

“Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia are unacceptable and sabotage the global economy,” Kallas said in a post on X.

She added that she had spoken with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud about diplomatic efforts to end the fighting in Yemen and restore freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

Hundreds of thousands of Iranians have marched in a government-organised show of defiance in Tehran, pledging their readiness to take up arms.

The Iranian government showcased a newly formed volunteer force at the rally on Friday. It will receive limited military and emergency response training to serve as an additional layer of security for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Basij militia.

Volunteers rallied through downtown Tehran in combat uniforms, some carrying flags and weapons, while the government displayed drones, anti-aircraft batteries and other weaponry.

Iranian authorities said 313,000 people joined the event in the capital. Attendance figures could not be independently verified.

Tehran’s IRGC chief, Hassan Hassanzadeh, told the state broadcaster IRIB that over 600,000 people had registered to participate in the voluntary Janfada-ye-Iran campaign. That roughly translates to “Those who sacrifice their lives for Iran”, with over one million expected to take part in the training.

Senior Iranian leaders at the rally included President Masoud Pezeshkian and Basij head, Hossein Taeb.

Taeb told participants that the volunteers would be ready for “full-fledged defence” and would be a “nightmare” for Iran’s enemies.

A broader strategy

Iranian authorities say mobilising the new volunteer force is part of a broader defence strategy.

“The Islamic Republic has mobilised these people to show that they are united, that they have solidarity and that their people are ready to give anything for the country,” said Al Jazeera’s Sinem Koseoglu, reporting from the rally.

Women and teenagers have also registered with the volunteer units, she added.

“I want to show the world that Iran is strong and united. We don’t want war, but we’re ready to defend our country to the very end,” one of the volunteers, Bahera, told our reporter.

Another volunteer, wearing a combat uniform and carrying a rifle, said: “This is our homeland and we won’t let others decide its future”.

President Pezeshkian said in a speech that the rally was a show of solidarity, Koseoglu noted.

“This is not only a message to countries like the US and Israel, which are attacking Iran, but also to the Islamic Republic that we are ready for any crisis.”

Economy and mobilisation

Friday’s rally happened as the Iranian economy struggles under the US naval blockade of Iranian ports and new US sanctions.

Esmaeil Baghaei, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, condemned the “brutal economic war, deliberately designed to inflict maximum pain and suffering on every Iranian citizen”.

As the latest addition to its economic pressure campaign, the US administration on Thursday went after digital currency networks that it says are illegally providing sanctioned Iranian entities with access to the international financial system.

The struggling economy was a key driver for protests last December that quickly turned into a challenge to the political system in place since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Iran said about 3,000 people were killed in the protests, but activists say the state crackdown killed over 7,000.

However, the war launched in late February by US-Israeli strikes has since allowed the authorities to regain the initiative by presenting themselves as a bulwark against the country’s enemies.

The volunteer mobilisation campaign started in early April, at the height of US-Israeli attacks.

According to the authorities, more than 30 million people registered for a potential call-up, about a third of the population of 86 million.

United Nations says 22 million people need humanitarian aid as conflict intensifies.

More than 112,000 people have been displaced in Yemen and close to 3,000 have fled the conflict to Djibouti, according to the United Nations, as fighting intensifies between the Iran-allied Houthis and Saudi-backed forces loyal to the internationally recognised government.

“Our resources are very, very, very limited and our stocks will be depleted very soon,” Abdusattor Esoev, mission chief in Yemen for the International Organization for Migration, told reporters on Friday.

Most of the more than 112,000 internally displaced people have been displaced over the last two weeks, mainly along the west coast and in the provinces of Taiz and Lahj, he added.

The displacement began when the Houthis made a rapid advance, seizing control of the entire Red Sea coast of Yemen to tighten their grip on the vital shipping route, the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.

Esoev estimates 22 million Yemenis – or nearly half the population – are in urgent need of humanitarian aid.

More than 65,000 registered refugees and asylum seekers in Yemen, mainly from Somalia and Ethiopia, are also threatened.

3,000 Yemenis flee to Djibouti

The crisis is growing “by the hour”, warned Francesco Galtieri, a representative for the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), adding that thousands of women who have lost all their possessions are on the run with their children.

Galtieri estimates that 2,000 pregnant women are among the displaced and around 200 are expected to give birth shortly.

Around 3,000 Yemenis have fled Yemen by boat to Djibouti, the UN refugee agency said. The shortest route across the Bab al-Mandeb Strait is just over 25 kilometres.

The UNHCR reports that more than 2,400 people made the voyage in the past week – mostly women, children and older people.

The influx is adding pressure on Djibouti and population of about one million people. It already hosts around 36,000 refugees, most from Somalia and Ethiopia, said UNHCR representative Sandrine Desamours.

“While the number may sound small,” it must be seen in proportion to the population, she added.

The strategically important Bab al-Mandeb links the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and has become an alternative shipping route as the United States’ war against Iran choked the Strait of Hormuz.

Real Madrid stars including Kylian Mbappe rolled up T-shirts showing support for Ceuta, but President trip ‘unrelated’.

Real Madrid President ‌Florentino Perez attended an event at Ceuta city hall ⁠on Friday in ⁠a visit to show solidarity with the Spanish territory, saying that it was not related to any recent ⁠developments.

On Tuesday, before Real’s La Liga match with Elche, Kylian Mbappe, Vinicius Jr and Ibrahima Konate obscured the message “We are all mackerels”, ⁠which appeared on T-shirts worn by the rest of the players. “Mackerels” is a nickname for people from Ceuta, and the shirts were designed to show support for them.

Mbappe said on Wednesday that he did not ‌want to prioritise the suffering of one group over another. Real told the news agency Reuters that they respected their players’ freedom to make their own decisions, but noted that they had shown support for Ceuta a week earlier with a tifo during their Champions League match with Inter Milan.

Perez was accompanied by honorary ⁠Real Madrid President Jose Martinez Pirri, a native ⁠of Ceuta. They were welcomed by Regional President Juan Jesus Vivas.

“I want to emphasise, to avoid any doubts, that today’s event has been prepared over several weeks ⁠with the president of Ceuta, not due to any recent news,” Perez said at the city ⁠hall.

“And I also take this opportunity to ⁠convey all our support, all our affection, and our solidarity during these very difficult times to all Ceutans. It is our wish that normality resumes as soon ‌as possible in Ceuta.”

In July, more than 70,000 irregular crossings into Ceuta from Morocco took place, causing disruption in the territory. Real ‌Madrid’s ‌show of solidarity is one of many gestures that have taken place across Spain since the mass crossings.

Israeli politicians reacted to sanctions by states including the United Kingdom, France, and Canada on the country’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank with self-righteous anger. But what is the latest example of Israel’s international isolation brought on by its treatment of the Palestinian people has not been influential in swaying the electorate in the run-up to October’s elections, analysts tell Al Jazeera.

Responding to the UK Foreign Minister Ed Miliband’s accusation that Israelis were ethnically cleansing the occupied West Bank, Israel’s Gideon Saar accused his counterpart of spreading “outrageous lies” and attempting to interfere in the election through foreign pressure.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog also condemned the measures, branding them a “gross interference in the democratic elections” of Israel.

But, in reality, the majority of Jewish Israelis have supported their country’s genocidal war in Gaza and the occupation of the West Bank.

A poll from August, published as the death toll for Palestinians killed in the West Bank had already reached 76 this year, showed that more than half of Jewish Israelis supported retaining the illegal settlements as part of any future agreement on a Palestinian state, while nearly 40 percent supported annexing the territory in defiance of international law.

“People just don’t care that settlements are illegal,” Israeli political analyst Ori Goldberg said.

”Ed Miliband expressed a number of laudable sentiments when announcing the measures,” Goldberg said, referencing the UK foreign secretary’s references to his own Jewish heritage when announcing the cessation of trade with Israel’s illegal outposts. “But we’re at the stage where Israelis aren’t even interested in the truth so much as they are the sentiment.”

Little political impact

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goes into the elections at serious risk of losing, with many polls predicting that a coalition of parties opposed to him could win the majority in Israel’s parliament.

But it will not be issues like the settlement-related sanctions that will lose him votes, analysts said.

Public backing for the “government and opposition blocs are pretty hardened, and nobody is going to switch from one side to the other over sanctions arising from [the settlements],” Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at the Israeli Policy Forum, said. He added that the sanctions were unlikely to weigh as heavily with the electorate as “this government’s record and the related feelings people have about Netanyahu”.

“When people were asked what would determine their vote, security came first,” Israeli sociologist Yehouda Shenhav-Shahrabani said.

“I think there are several mechanisms operating simultaneously,” he added.

First, he said, is the normalisation of the settlements. In Israeli public discourse, the occupied West Bank is increasingly referred to by the biblical name “Judea and Samaria” – a shift he said was becoming institutionalised.

“Second, external sanctions don’t necessarily translate into domestic political costs,” Shenhav-Shahrabani said. “And perhaps most importantly, politically foreign pressure can be absorbed into an existing Israeli narrative [of anti-Semitism] rather than [changing how the issue itself is understood].”

No criticism of the voters

None of Israel’s most prominent politicians has criticised the government for its support of the settlements in defiance of international condemnation. Yair Lapid, a former prime minister and one of Netanyahu’s leading opponents, has, instead, focused his ire on the countries condemning Israel. “Imposing boycotts and sanctions on Israel is a grave mistake,” he said. “This is a wrong and dangerous policy, at the wrong time and for the wrong reasons.”

Another of Netanyahu’s principal rivals, Gadi Eisenkot – whose Yashar Party manifesto does not mention either the West Bank or Gaza – has declined to speak on the sanctions directly. Netanyahu has also yet to comment on the sanctions publicly, despite his Likud party having championed settlement expansion for decades.

“The sanctions haven’t particularly hurt Netanyahu, at least not as far as we can see in terms of direct influence on … polling,” said Dahlia Scheindlin, a pollster and public opinion researcher based in Tel Aviv.

Instead, the focus has been on other elements of an eventful electoral cycle, including the emergence of new challengers to Netanyahu on the right.

“We aren’t seeing any real backlash from the sanctions,” Scheindlin said. “Instead, it’s just getting filtered through what people already think of him – his critics dislike him even more, and his supporters basically say, ‘Well, the world hates us no matter what.’”

Sanaa, Yemen – Ahmed Yahya, 28, fills his taxi with 10 litres of petrol as he begins his workday early in the morning.

“I feed my taxi with fuel first so that it can help feed my family,” Yahya, a taxi driver, said as he wiped the dust from his front window at a petrol station on the outskirts of Sanaa.

Up until earlier this week, Yahya used to pay 4,750 Yemeni riyals, the equivalent of roughly $8.90 in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen. The price had remained unchanged for about four years in territory under the rebel group’s control – including the capital Sanaa.

But then, on Monday, the Houthis announced a roughly 10 percent increase in the price of petrol, up to 5,250 Yemeni Riyals ($9.80). After years of economic misery, Yahya described the price hike as another “painful surprise to an already devastated people”.

The Houthi-run Yemen Petroleum Company said the diesel and petrol price increase was the result of a “global increase in fuel prices”, and promised that it would be temporary. The increase in global oil prices this year comes off the back of the impact of the United States-Israel war on Iran. But, more recently, the Houthis’ own capture of Yemen’s southern Red Sea coast from government forces last week, and attacks on Saudi Arabia, have played a major role in increasing prices.

“When I heard the announcement of the new fuel price, I was shocked and frustrated. We’re hardly surviving, and this price increase will make survival even harder,” said Yahya, as he lamented another burden in a country where 18 million already face acute food insecurity – a lack of reliable access to enough food.

‘Rent or food?’

Yahya, a father of three, has been working as a taxi driver for five years. Although the job helps make ends meet, he feels financially insecure, especially with the ongoing changes in food and fuel prices.

“My family spend about 75,000 Yemeni riyals [$140] a month on food expenses such as flour, rice and cooking oil. With the fuel price rise, we will need at least 85,000 Yemeni riyals [$159] a month for the same food items,” said Yahya.

The resumption of fighting in Yemen in the past few months, after a four-year period of relative calm in the country’s war, has contributed to the price rises. But for Yahya, relatively safe in Sanaa, it’s the increased expenses that are the more troubling development.

“When prices rise, they affect what we eat, drink, and how we live,” he said. “Let me give you an example: I pay 25,000 Yemeni riyals [$47] in rent every month. With the increase in food prices, putting money aside to pay the rent has become more challenging. What is the priority? Rent or food?”

An April report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said that Yemen’s internal conflict has led to significant macroeconomic vulnerabilities and a marked decrease in income per capita, leaving more than half of the population in urgent need of humanitarian assistance.

“It [the conflict] has caused widespread food insecurity, disease outbreaks, mass family displacement, and limited access to clean water,” the report said.

Risky and costly transportation

One of the links between the renewed fighting and the increase in prices is the longer distances needed to transport products across the country, as truckers avoid roads near the front lines.

“A truck carrying goods from the south to the north or vice versa now takes up to a week to reach its final destination. Before the renewed fighting, a similar journey would have taken three days or less,” explained Saleh Abdullah, a shopkeeper in Sanaa.

The increased transportation costs, including the higher fuel prices, are passed on to the consumer.

“This means no family is immune to this trouble,” Abdullah said. “Whether it is the flour, the baby milk, the fruits, the vegetables, or anything else, families will feel the pain of price increases.”

“Some customers become angry at us when we sell products at a higher price,” he added. “We didn’t impose prices. We just react and adapt to the changes in the country or the region.”

Ibrahim Abdu, an employee at the Nehm customs checkpoint in Sanaa governorate, said the number of trucks arriving in the capital has declined over the past few weeks.

“Fighting has cut off many roads, and merchants have avoided risking their products and drivers,” he told Al Jazeera.

‘A hunger multiplier’

Years of war have taken a heavy toll on Yemen’s economy, disrupted businesses, and pushed millions of people into poverty and food insecurity. Against this bleak backdrop, the country’s humanitarian tragedy has been worsening.

Ahmed Mohammed, a former humanitarian worker in Hodeidah, describes the fuel price rise as a “hunger multiplier” in war-torn Yemen.

“If a breadwinner struggles to buy a family three meals a day, he may be able to afford only two given the rising price of food commodities. This will deepen hunger among families,” said Mohammed.

He added: “War is ugly, and one of its ugliest aspects is seeing a family unable to afford a kilogramme of flour, sugar or rice.”

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) warned this week that the violence threatens to trigger a humanitarian crisis as more people are displaced, pressuring communities with limited resources.

A multi-faceted impact

Wafiq Saleh, an economic researcher and executive director of the Taiz Centre for Yemeni-Gulf Studies, said the 10 percent hike in fuel prices in Houthi-controlled areas deals a blow to Yemeni consumers.

“Its impact will manifest as a major inflationary wave, placing a heavy burden on the most vulnerable and income-deprived segments of society,” Saleh told Al Jazeera.

While this price increase may appear modest in percentage terms, its effects extend far beyond the petrol station, rippling through various goods and services and creating new hardships, according to Saleh.

“Petroleum products serve as intermediate inputs for a wide range of goods and services. Consequently, a 10 percent rise in fuel prices does not merely increase people’s expenses by 10 percent; it triggers a cascading effect on prices,” he said.

“The most severely affected sectors include agriculture – which relies on diesel for crop irrigation – and the transport and services sectors, where rising costs immediately drive up passenger fares and food prices.”

He added that the increase would also affect water and electricity services, many of which rely on diesel-powered generators, further increasing the cost of basic services.

Small- and medium-sized enterprises are similarly affected.

“Small enterprises are operating on narrow profit margins, and they may be forced to either cease operations or pass the increased costs on to the final consumer,” Saleh said.

Italy’s defence minister warns of severe economic fallout if Bab al-Mandeb becomes impassable, bypassing EU delays.

Italy will deploy warships to ensure safe passage for its commercial vessels through the Bab al-Mandeb strait, Defence Minister Guido Crosetto said, adding that Rome would not wait for a joint decision from the European Union.

“We have the capabilities to protect the passage,” Crosetto said, warning that if the waterway became impassable, the economic consequences would be severe.

The Italian defence minister said that Rome “must not allow bureaucratic delays in decision-making to exacerbate an already complex situation”.

Bab al-Mandeb links the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, forming one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors between Europe and Asia and a critical route for oil, gas and container traffic heading to and from the Suez Canal.

Roughly 12 to 15 percent of global trade has historically passed through the narrow waterway, which separates Yemen from Djibouti and Eritrea on the African side and is only about 30km (19 miles) wide at its narrowest point.

The strait’s importance has grown sharply since Iran effectively seized control of the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year amid its war with the United States and Israel, choking off the world’s most important oil chokepoint and pushing much of the Gulf’s crude exports towards alternative routes.

Saudi Arabia, in particular, has increasingly relied on pipelines and Red Sea shipping to bypass Hormuz altogether, making the Bab al-Mandeb strait one of the last major arteries still open to Gulf oil reaching global markets.

Control of the strait has been contested for years, as Yemen’s government, Houthi rebels and, at times, forces in the region have held stretches of its coastline at different points since the war in Yemen began in 2015.

The significance of the strait has been hit dramatically in the past few weeks, when the Iran-backed Houthi movement launched a rapid offensive that brought the entirety of Yemen’s western Red Sea coast under its control, including several strategically located islands.

The advance has given the Houthis effectively unrestricted access to the waterway, a development seen as a major setback for international shipping, given the group’s history of attacking vessels it associates with the US or its allies in the region.

The US and the European Union have already carried out military operations aimed at better protecting merchant ships from Houthi attacks in the area, though those efforts have struggled to fully secure the route as fighting in Yemen has escalated.

Recurring floods disrupt daily life in Tunis, raising questions about drainage, transport and flood preparedness.

Tunis, Tunisia – Heavy rain brought parts of Tunisia’s capital to a standstill on Thursday, flooding roads and homes, trapping people in cars and disrupting electricity and internet services.

Home to nearly three million people, the Greater Tunis region has faced repeated flooding in recent years. Thursday’s flooding came only months after severe January rains caused widespread disruption across the capital and other parts of the country, leaving several people dead and causing significant damage.

Weather warnings had been issued in advance, but the decision to suspend classes in Tunis was announced only shortly before it took effect. Parents rushed to schools to collect their children as the rain intensified and traffic backed up across the capital.

Videos shared online showed flooded streets, cars stranded in rising water and what appeared to be power lines catching fire. Residents also reported power and internet cuts and water entering homes.

‘The road became almost unrecognisable’

Fatma, a 35-year-old employee in Tunis, said the situation deteriorated quickly as she struggled to get home safely.

“At about 4pm, the road became almost unrecognisable. The tunnel leading to Bab Saadoun was completely closed because of the rain,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Most people were stranded by the roadside for hours, waiting for public transport that never came. I saw three cars that filled with water and broke down, and people carrying their children on their shoulders.”

“Every season, the same thing happens. Roads close and traffic comes to a complete standstill. All the drains start overflowing with waste,” she said.

The National Institute of Meteorology had warned of locally heavy thunderstorms on Thursday, including heavy rain over short periods that could cause flooding, disrupt traffic and overwhelm drainage networks. It also warned of potential power cuts.

Residents question flood preparedness

“Tunisia has become used to these disasters. Every year, we end up flooded even when there is little rain,” said Intissar, 33, from the Lafayette area of Tunis.

She blamed local authorities for failing to carry out preventive work before the rainy season.

“This is work that should have been done during the summer,” she said.

But she also acknowledged the role of residents.

“We cannot deny the responsibility of citizens who dump waste that blocks drainage channels,” she said.

At a government meeting in August, officials called for drainage networks and waterways to be cleaned and flood-protection work to be accelerated. The government said 29 flood-protection projects were under way across the country.

The flooding comes as Tunisia prepares for a national march in Tunis on Saturday, with organisers calling for the release of four activists detained in connection with the Al-Soumoud Flotilla. The march is scheduled for 5pm, as rain is forecast to continue through Saturday.

A struggle to get home

Fatma said the lack of reliable public transport, combined with repeated flooding, was making it increasingly difficult for people to manage without cars.

“The problem makes people look for their own solutions. That is why most people are trying to find a way to buy a car, because it has become difficult to live without one with these recurring problems,” she said.

The flooding also came as students returned to schools and universities this week, adding pressure to roads and public transport.

For Fatma, the disruption is becoming a familiar pattern.

“This shows that the state has no vision. It is caught off-guard just like citizens are,” she said.

Report says ‘reasonable grounds’ US was behind the deadly strike against a school in Minab in February.

Critics say Serbia’s military ties with Israel are rising significantly.

Serbia has opened a factory ⁠to assemble advanced Israeli-made drones, which will supply ⁠the Serbian military and armed forces in other countries.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic inaugurated the facility jointly operated with an unnamed Israeli company on Thursday.

“Our plans are huge,” Vucic said in a social media post showing a video of him touring the facility with Israeli Ambassador Avivit Bar-Ilan, adding that at least three more factories will be opened across Serbia with Israeli partners.

Vucic said the facility “will employ around 100 workers and produce state-of-the-art equipment both for the Serbian Armed Forces and the armies of some other countries”.

Vucic did not disclose the factory’s location or the Israeli firm involved, saying journalists were excluded from the opening because of “the confidentiality of the production process”.

Previous reporting by investigative outlet BIRN and Israeli newspaper Haaretz has identified Israeli defence firm Elbit Systems as Serbia’s partner in the drone-manufacturing process.

Elbit has previously been criticised over its role in operations in Gaza and the West Bank.

Last month, Vucic told Serbian news outlet Nezavisne Dnevne Novine that the goal of the factory was to “preserve peace and stability, and to be strong enough to deter all potential aggressors”.

Serbia is one of the few countries in the Western Balkans that is not a NATO member, and it has invested heavily in its military to “preserve neutrality”.

It has faced scrutiny over arms exports to Israel, which BIRN and Haaretz said rose from 1.4 million euros ($1.6 million) in 2023 to 42.3 million euros ($48.5 million) in 2024.

During a visit to Serbia earlier this year, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese said Belgrade remained one of Israel’s “most steadfast and determined allies” despite calls for more countries to restrict weapons exports due to the war in Gaza.

The mission also said Iranian authorities committed crimes against humanity during their crackdown on protests in late 2025 and early this year.

The United States likely committed “war crimes” in Iran when it launched a pair of air strikes that killed at least 178 civilians, including women and children, a United Nations fact-finding mission has found.

The report by the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran on Thursday also accused Iran of human rights violations and crimes against humanity during protests last year and in early 2026.

The mission referred to the US attack on Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, which killed over 150 people – including approximately 120 children – on February 28, when the US and Israel launched their war against Iran.

The mission also referred to the US air strike on a “clearly identifiable” sports complex and residential area in Lamerd the same day, where precision strike missiles dispersed clouds of tungsten pellets, killing 22 civilian men and women.

The findings, to be submitted to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, examined the US’s conduct during the Iran war and the Iranian government’s response to nationwide unrest that began in late December.

US air strikes against civilians

The attack on the school in Minab was conducted with the use of Tomahawk missiles.

“The Mission concluded that when identifying and directing its attack against the primary school in Minab, whose civilian nature is apparent, the US failed in its obligation to do everything feasible to verify that it was a military objective,” the report stated.

The report’s authors said that photographs and videos depicting the school before and after the strike showed “readily identifiable features” that it was associated with an educational facility for young children.

“These included child-oriented murals painted on exterior walls, school signage, and playground areas,” said the UN report.

“According to public reporting, satellite imagery of the school before the strike also appears to show human figures, readily identifiable as children, gathered in its courtyard.”

Following the strike, state-affiliated media showed widespread destruction at the site, including parents holding the body parts of their children, and bloodied backpacks and schoolbooks.

“Several families lost more than one child, reflecting the devastating impact of the attack on families and the wider community,” the report said.

In June, US President Donald Trump said that “nobody” purposefully attacked a girls’ school in Iran in February, citing an investigation into the incident, for which the Pentagon has not yet published any findings.

Regarding the strike in Lamerd, the mission similarly found that the sports centre attacked was “visibly separate” from an adjacent compound belonging to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The US Central Command said in a statement in March that US forces did not launch any strikes into the city of Lamerd on that day.

Iran protests

The UN mission additionally accused Iran of repressing demonstrators during the country’s 2025-2026 protests through an internet shutdown, unlawful killings, torture, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances and severe restrictions on freedom of expression.

It also stated that the number of deaths and injuries by state forces is much higher than the government’s reported toll – which says 3,038 people were killed and 25,000 people injured – but could not verify exact numbers.

Tehran claims the majority of deaths occurred due to “rioters” during the protests backed by exiled opponents and the US and Israel.

The UN fact-finding mission urged Iran and the US to immediately end hostilities, provide reparations to victims, and seek permanent peace through diplomatic means.

Intensifying attacks between Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s Houthis have reportedly killed at least five people in total, including three children.

At least one person – a Yemeni resident in Saudi Arabia – was killed, and two others were injured after a Houthi drone was intercepted in Saudi Arabia’s southwestern governorate of Taif on Thursday, according to the kingdom’s civil defence agency.

It is the first death announced in Saudi Arabia this month since Yemen’s Iran-allied Houthis intensified their attacks.

In Yemen on Thursday, the Houthis said “Saudi enemy warplanes targeted three telecommunications towers” in Taiz province.

One civilian was killed in Taiz and another injured in strikes on the town of Abs, Yemen, said Houthi-linked Almasirah television.

Houthi-backed media later reported that “three children were killed and several Yemeni nationals were injured in strikes by the Saudi-backed mercenaries”, a reference to the country’s internationally recognised government forces.

Houthis reject claim they attacked Mecca

The escalation comes as Saudi Arabia said a drone was launched by the Houthis towards Mecca before being intercepted and destroyed.

“It’s a heinous lie,” Houthi leader Abdel-Malik al-Houthi said in a live televised address on Thursday, calling Saudi claims that his group would target Islam’s holiest city “a great propaganda”.

“The sanctity of Mecca is particularly important to the people of Yemen,” he said while accusing Saudi Arabia of “weaponising lies” to serve its war objectives against the Houthis.

Reporting from the Yemeni capital Sanaa, Al Jazeera’s Yousef Mawry said: “Al-Houthi’s speech is not just directed towards the Yemeni people; it is directed to the world to set the record straight that the Houthis did not target the holy city of Mecca, as the Saudis claim.”

In his address, al-Houthi also said Saudi Arabia had initiated the latest round of conflict in Yemen and that Houthi forces are acting defensively.

Meanwhile, Rashad al-Alimi, the head of Yemen’s Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council, said that Houthi forces are suffering heavy blows on the fronts in Taiz, Marib, Lahj, al-Jawf, Hajjah, al-Bayda al-Dhale.

In a meeting with the French ambassador to Yemen, al-Alimi said that gains made by the Houthis along the Red Sea coast are temporary, the state-run Saba news agency reported.

Aggression against Mecca ‘a condemned act’

Esmaeil Baghaei, Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, said in a statement on X on Thursday that any aggression against Islamic holy sites, particularly Mecca, “is a condemned act”.

But he added that “a mere claim” of intercepting a drone “en route to Mecca” is not enough to accuse the Houthis of the act.

“Nor should we forget that our region has witnessed numerous instances of ‘false flag’ operations, particularly in recent months,” Baghaei said while pointing at Israel.

Meanwhile, China ⁠has privately asked Iranian officials to help rein in the ⁠Houthis after Saudi Arabia appealed to Beijing following recent Houthi attacks, anonymous sources in Iran told the Reuters news agency.

Beijing publicly called for restraint, dialogue and the restoration of safe navigation, but its private message went further than that, Reuters reported.

The escalation is also threatening to draw in other regional actors – specifically Saudi defence partners Pakistan and Turkiye, which signed a joint defence agreement with the kingdom last month.

Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said the time has come to implement the Mecca agreement with Saudi Arabia and Turkiye due to recent Houthi attacks.

Asif’s comments to Pakistani media on Thursday were made as Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he’d held a phone conversation with Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir to discuss “regional developments”.

Public broadcaster RTE says the country’s participation cannot be justified amid ‘appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza’.

Ireland has become the second country, after the Netherlands, to announce a boycott of next year’s Eurovision Song Contest over Israel’s participation.

Irish public broadcaster RTE said in a statement on Thursday that the country’s participation could not be justified “given the appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza” and that the humanitarian crisis in the enclave “continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk”.

RTE, which manages Ireland’s selection and participation in Eurovision, added that it remained “deeply concerned by the continued denial of independent access [for] international journalists to the territory”.

The decision marks the second consecutive year that Ireland will neither participate in nor broadcast the competition, which is the world’s most popular television music show.

Earlier this month, Eurovision organisers said they were excluding any country involved in an armed conflict from hosting the competition.

However, the Dutch public broadcaster Avrotros said the exclusion of countries in conflict was not “sufficient”.

Avrotros announced last month that it was withdrawing from the 2027 competition.

It said Eurovision could “no longer be considered neutral” given Israel’s participation in “a large-scale military conflict” in Gaza.

Both Ireland and the Netherlands were among five countries that withdrew from Eurovision 2026 in Vienna earlier this year. Spain, Slovenia and Iceland also decided not to participate.

Eurovision Director Martin Green said on Thurday that organisers “fully respect” Ireland’s decision and that they “will be missed”.

“The Eurovision Song Contest is at its best when broadcasters and their artists from different countries come together to share music, celebrate creativity and create connections between audiences,” Green said.

“That power to bring people together is at the heart of what makes the Contest so special, and is even more important now in an increasingly difficult and divided world.”

The 2026 show, which Bulgaria won, attracted 132 million viewers, 34 million fewer than its 2025 edition.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the venue in the Austrian capital during the final in mid-May to oppose Israel’s participation.

The European Broadcasting Union organises the annual music competition. It has faced accusations of applying a double standard for refusing to exclude Israel, despite banning Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Iran’s missiles and drones have downed dozens of US aircraft, damaged or destroyed hundreds of the United States’ buildings at its bases in the Middle East, and drained its inventories of military equipment worth billions of dollars, the Pentagon conceded earlier this week.

On Wednesday, Tehran unleashed another unlikely weapon in its war against the US: a maths equation.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has also been a lead negotiator during talks between Tehran and Washington at different stages during the past six months, typed out a version of the Taylor equation, a formula used by central banks to determine interest rates, in a post on X loaded with a wartime message.

“Let’s see if a hike could open SOH or produce a single barrel,” he wrote, referring to interest rate hikes and the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway Iran has effectively blocked for global shipping.

“You can’t 25bp [basis points] a chokepoint,” he added, seemingly again referring to the strait. “It’s SOH risk premium, and We set it.”

Hours after Ghalibaf’s post, the US Federal Reserve did raise the benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points.

Early in the war, which was launched by the US and Israel against Iran on February 28, Ghalibaf frequently used financial arguments to mock how the conflict was being conducted by the administration of US President Donald Trump, to point to Iran’s ability to hurt Washington economically unless it changed its approach.

Now he’s turned to maths.

“This is a spectacular bit of agitprop from Iran, a country which, if nothing else in 2026, has demonstrated an impressive ability to needle its US opponent,” Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, told Al Jazeera.

But what exactly is Ghalibaf trying to say? What is the Taylor equation, has the Iran war influenced the US interest rate, and does Tehran “set it”, as the parliament speaker has suggested?

What is the Taylor equation that Ghalibaf cited?

The rule is a formula economists use to estimate where a central bank should set interest rates based on inflation and the strength of the economy.

Developed by economist John Taylor in the early 1990s, the rule links the US federal funds rate to inflation and the “output gap” – the difference between actual economic output and its potential.

In its simplest form, the formula is:

Interest rate = inflation + 0.5(output gap) + 0.5(inflation − 2%) + 2%.

This means the recommended interest rate rises when inflation moves above the 2 percent target or when economic output exceeds its potential. It falls when inflation weakens or the economy operates below potential.

However, the equation is a benchmark, not a set rule that is strictly followed. Policymakers at the US Federal Reserve weigh other economic factors when setting interest rates.

Is the Iran war a factor in the US interest rate hike?

Trump’s tariffs, the energy shock following the US-Israeli war with Iran, and heavy investment associated with the artificial intelligence boom, taken together, have kept inflationary pressures strong, experts say.

On Wednesday, when the US Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 25bp, it was the first increase in three years.

Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh, in his speech following the rate hike, said renewed fighting between the US and Iran, which has pushed up petrol prices, helped convince Fed officials to support higher rates.

“There’s no hiding from hot spots around the world,” Warsh said.

IG Group’s Beauchamp said, “The Iran war, indirectly, is a huge driver of last night’s hike, though no one wants to admit it.”

“The energy spike has combined with the rise in yields to drive the Fed into a corner with no way out,” he said.

Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at the Wealth Club, said there is “no denying” that Iran’s retaliatory action against the US and its allies across the Gulf region has “intensified concerns about energy supplies and led to hotter inflation forecasts”.

“The ongoing geopolitical turmoil and elevated crude prices certainly were key issues behind the Fed’s decision to hike rates,” she said.

Is Iran ‘setting’ the US interest rate?

In short, no.

Wealth Club’s Streeter cautioned that while the war in the Middle East and rising oil prices were certainly an element in the Fed’s decision, they weren’t the “only factors at play”.

“The spending might of AI hyperscalers has also pulsed through the veins of the economy, with strong capital investment and resilient domestic demand adding to inflationary pressures, so policymakers will have been looking at the whole picture,” she noted.

“So, while Tehran has arguably had an influence on some of the forces feeding into US monetary policy, particularly through the impact of the conflict on oil supplies and prices, it is not ‘setting’ US interest rates.”

Streeter said the US Federal Reserve was responding to a much broader set of economic conditions.

“Iran’s actions have affected the inflation outlook, but the decision on where to set interest rates ultimately rests with the Federal Reserve, and there are plenty of other data points policymakers use,” she noted.

What’s behind Ghalibaf’s maths mocking?

In March, Iran’s parliamentary speaker had repeatedly used social media to comment on markets and energy prices, including mocking efforts by the Trump administration to influence oil futures and arguing that financial manoeuvring could not create “actual fuel” at petrol stations.

Last month, Ghalibaf posted a graphic bearing the phrase “Make America Hungry Again” – a play on Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” – together with statistics on food insecurity and hunger in the US.

“You can’t cover up defeats with false claims,” he said.

President Donald Trump says the United States is “hopefully toward the end” of its war with Iran, claiming that he has directly spoken to officials in Tehran, raising the prospect of renewed diplomacy even as fighting has erupted in Yemen.

However, there is still no confirmation from Tehran that direct negotiations with Washington have resumed. Just a day earlier, a senior Iranian official publicly rejected talks unless Iran’s conditions were met. Tehran, which has, in effect, closed the Strait of Hormuz, has been demanding that the US honour the terms of the deal signed in June.

Trump’s comments come as the conflict has expanded into Yemen, putting increasing pressure on global energy supplies amid an Iran-imposed blockade of the strait through which a fifth of global oil and gas passes. Oil prices crossed $100 per barrel last week and continue to rise as Iran-linked Houthis have damaged Saudi oil installations amid renewed fighting.

So, what is the latest on the diplomatic front, and will the war end soon?

What is Trump saying?

“Well, hopefully we are toward the end of the war,” he told reporters on Wednesday. “They want to make a deal. We’ll see how that works out.”

When asked by a reporter whether he had recently heard from the Iranian side, Trump said he had spoken with them “directly”.

The comments come after Trump on Monday said he was open to talks, and added that Iran “wants to make a deal, quickly and badly” and that he would decide whether Washington would engage with Tehran.

However, Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, accused Trump of sending “mixed signals” and said “no talks until Iran’s conditions are met”.

Trump’s claim that he has heard from Iran “directly” is significant because negotiations between Washington and Tehran have repeatedly depended on intermediaries, including Qatar, Pakistan and Oman. This is not the first time that Trump has claimed direct communication with Iran.

Former Iranian diplomat Abbas Khameyar dismissed Trump’s claims. “I don’t think there has been any additional effort beyond what was already under way in recent weeks,” he told Al Jazeera.

There is a US narrative, he stated, “with tweets and statements by President Trump claiming that the Iranians are calling, pleading and asking for a meeting. But nobody believes this, and matters have not unfolded in that way.”

He added that Iran’s diplomatic activity has not moved beyond the framework already in place in recent weeks, centred on securing enforcement of the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) rather than opening new negotiations.

What is the latest on the US-Iran diplomacy front?

On Thursday, Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim news agency reported that Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a telephone call with Pakistani army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, who has been leading the high-stakes diplomatic and mediation efforts between Washington and Tehran.

Araghchi held the phone call while still in Beijing, during which they discussed and consulted on the latest regional developments and issues of mutual interest, according to Tasnim.

A day earlier, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi called on the US and Iran to exercise restraint and “reopen the Strait of Hormuz at an early date”, following his meeting with Araghchi in Beijing.

Araghchi, in a statement after the meeting, said that Tehran seeks “the restoration of calm to the region and friendly and peaceful relations with our neighbours”.

“In this regard we have begun dialogue with the countries of the region,” he added.

In a post on X, Araghchi described consultations with Chinese officials as “successful”, saying Tehran values the strategic partnership it has built with Beijing.

“Today’s decisions will decide the future strategic balance in the region, with immeasurable knock-on effects,” Araghchi said on Thursday.

China has avoided direct involvement in the war, but President Xi Jinping, at the BRICS summit in New Delhi over the weekend, offered Beijing’s willingness to play a role in peace efforts. He called on BRICS nations to advance peace in the Middle East.

Huiyao Wang, president of the Center For China and Globalization think tank in Beijing, says China’s role in international affairs is increasing in importance during the current geopolitical turmoil.

“China has an enormous role to exercise if needed. So the mere fact that the two fighting parties have no end in sight shows the need for a big guarantor to come in … I think the US wants to end this war and they also need China’s help,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

Meanwhile, US media outlet Axios is reporting that Trump is expected to meet Gulf leaders on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly next week to discuss the conflict, which has hugely affected oil exports from the Middle Eastern countries.

Diplomatic efforts have repeatedly stalled since a Pakistan-brokered MoU signed by Washington and Tehran collapsed last month, as the two sides accused each other of violating their commitments.

The MoU was supposed to kick-start a 60-day period for peace talks between the warring sides and included provisions for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has become a major flashpoint in the war.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said earlier this month that Tehran would return to the agreement if Washington did the same.

What do we know about the Houthi meeting with US officials?

US officials met representatives of Yemen’s Houthi movement at the US embassy in Muscat over the weekend, five sources told Reuters news agency. Oman helped organise the meeting.

The Houthis told US officials they did not intend to attack American vessels and remained committed to their 2025 ceasefire with Washington, according to two sources.

One source said they also pledged not to target Israeli or other commercial vessels, with the exception of Saudi ships.

The conflict had largely subsided in recent years after a 2022 ceasefire between the Saudi-backed government and the Iran-aligned Houthis, but reignited in July.

In recent weeks, the Houthis have seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline to cement their grip on the key Bab al-Mandeb strait – a vital maritime route connecting Asia with Europe – while declaring a blockade on Saudi shipping.

The strategic waterway is a critical maritime corridor linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and has become an alternative shipping route as the US war against Iran choked the Strait of Hormuz.

On September 12, 2026, United States President Donald Trump stood in Dublin alongside Irish Prime Minister Micheal Martin and said in a cool tone that the Houthis “called us, and they don’t want to fight us”, adding that the group was “allowing ships to pass” and that the situation would “work out very well”.

His remarks came just as Houthi forces had completed their takeover of the coastal town of Dhubab and Perim (Mayyun) Island, which divides the Bab al-Mandeb strait into two shipping channels, after seizing the strategic port of Mocha. This gave them a direct presence at the entrance to one of the world’s most important waterways.

Trump was speaking against the backdrop of a Houthi announcement that they would blockade Saudi oil supplies to Asia and Saudi commercial shipping, signalling the collapse of the traditional “security-for-oil” formula.

What is happening at Bab al-Mandeb is not an isolated event, but the latest in a long series of US retreats from security commitments that for decades underpinned the “security-for-oil” relationship between Washington and the Gulf states.

This is not a passing political position, but a profound shift in the regional security landscape: the United States is choosing not to intervene militarily against an armed group designated as terrorist that controls one of the world’s most important straits and whose actions go beyond the logic of conventional deterrence.

Trump’s remarks: Substance and strategic context

In Dublin, Trump said the Houthis had contacted the US administration seeking to avoid confrontation with Washington. He said they were “allowing most ships to pass” and that the problem was limited to “one country”, which he did not name – an apparent reference to Saudi Arabia – promising to “take care of fixing that”.

He also said the United States had “tight control” over the Strait of Hormuz and that about 25 ships were passing through it each day on average, despite maritime sources denying this.

On the ground, Trump’s remarks suggested that the Houthis remain wary of US military force and American deterrence, which has already put considerable pressure on their regional backer, Iran. They were therefore prepared to bargain, just as they accepted US conditions in 2025.

At the same time, Trump’s directives – as relayed by US military and civilian officials – revealed a clear hierarchy of priorities: Iran as the principal threat, securing the Strait of Hormuz as the vital artery for oil and gas flows, and avoiding another military front in Yemen.

This reflects a narrow strategic logic. From Washington’s perspective, Bab al-Mandeb is less vital to American oil interests than to flows towards China and other Asian markets that compete with the US economy. And because Trump believes the Houthis “are not targeting American ships”, direct intervention would, in his view, place an unjustified additional burden on US forces already exhausted by the Iranian front.

Trump’s position also cannot be separated from domestic politics. The US-Iran war has eroded his political support after he promised to keep the United States out of Middle Eastern wars.

According to The Los Angeles Times, Trump told Fox News that he “might not do it because of the elections”, referring to avoiding further military escalation before the congressional elections. Opening a new front in Yemen could further complicate matters for Republicans in closely contested House and Senate races.

Meanwhile, Saudi circles denied an Axios report claiming that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had called Trump twice on the eve of the Houthi takeover of the coast on September 10, urging him to strike the Houthis, and that Trump had refused.

The sources pointed to Axios’s own July 29 report on Saudi Defence Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman’s visit to Washington, which said he had told the US vice president that the kingdom could manage the confrontation with the Houthis itself and did not need US military intervention. They regarded the two accounts as contradictions in the reporting of Axios’s Barak Ravid.

Observers in Riyadh see the restrained US position as part of a broader policy: the administration currently has no intention of taking direct military action against the Houthis. At the same time, Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of US Central Command, travelled to Riyadh for urgent coordination talks with Prince Mohammed, indicating that Washington is seeking to “intensify its support” for Saudi Arabia while avoiding direct military involvement – a formula well understood in Riyadh.

Trump sought to reassure Saudi concerns by describing the crown prince as a “good friend” and promising that “everything will work out very well”. But he offered no specific military commitment, and the White House announced no explicit guarantees to protect Saudi energy infrastructure or maritime routes.

This reluctance also follows a series of US decisions that have demonstrated a growing retreat from its security commitments in the Gulf. During his first term, Trump did not respond to the 2019 Aramco attack, for which the Houthis claimed responsibility but which was believed to have originated from Iraqi factions to the north. The attack temporarily knocked out half of Saudi oil supplies.

In February 2026, the United States joined Israel in attacking Iran without consulting its Gulf allies and has since faced growing difficulties defending them against Iranian attacks. US forces are now heavily preoccupied around the Strait of Hormuz, limiting their ability to respond to another front in Yemen.

Paradoxically, Washington, now bogged down in Hormuz, appears to need Saudi help in containing Iranian disruption at Bab al-Mandeb, rather than the other way round.

Since the war began on February 28, Riyadh has resisted all US pressure to become involved in a confrontation with Iran for two reasons. First, it believes such pressure carries an implicit aim of portraying the Saudi front as part of the Israeli front. Second, it was not consulted over the launch of the war and is not prepared to be worn down in a conflict serving Israeli objectives.

The erosion of the US umbrella and the fate of the ‘security-for-oil’ formula

Since the 1970s, the US-Gulf relationship has rested on a clear but implicit bargain: the United States provides a security umbrella protecting the Gulf states and energy routes, while the Gulf states ensure a steady flow of oil to the global economy at reasonable prices.

This was more than a bilateral understanding between Riyadh and Washington. Gulf security meant oil security, and oil security meant the security of the Western economy, making the bargain a pillar of the international energy system for decades.

Today, there are mounting signs that this formula is beginning to collapse.

First, strategic abandonment: Trump’s refusal to defend Bab al-Mandeb, and his response to the Houthis’ request that the US stay out of the conflict in return for allowing American ships to pass – effectively a political deal – marks a watershed. For the first time, the United States is clearly hesitating to defend energy security and a pivotal ally against a direct threat to global energy infrastructure. This is not temporary hesitation, but a redefinition of the US commitment.

Second, the redirection of priorities: Washington’s focus on the Strait of Hormuz and avoidance of a front in Yemen point to a new approach: not a comprehensive security umbrella, but selective protection of direct US interests. Hormuz matters because it carries Gulf oil to markets on which the US economy depends, while Bab al-Mandeb – from Trump’s perspective – primarily serves exports to China and Asia, interests Washington does not consider worth further military investment.

Third, military exhaustion: the US military is exhausted by the war with Iran and its stocks of advanced interceptor missiles have been depleted. This is structural rather than temporary, reflecting a growing inability to manage multiple fronts.

Fourth, domestic politics: the erosion of Trump’s political support because of the Iran war makes further military expansion politically costly. What was once a guarantee of Gulf security – US power – has become hostage to domestic electoral calculations.

Does this mean the end of the “security-for-oil” formula? Not necessarily. But it does point to a fundamental shift from a bilateral US-Gulf arrangement to a more complex, multilateral one.

The US umbrella has not disappeared, but it has contracted. The United States still maintains forces in the region and remains focused on the Strait of Hormuz, but its commitment is no longer comprehensive or unconditional.

Saudi strategic hedging

For years, Riyadh has been pursuing alternatives through strategic hedging. Its announcement of a 14-state multinational defensive maritime alliance – including Turkiye, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan and Djibouti – is an attempt to fill the US security vacuum, while US or European naval forces are also deployed around the strait as part of similar Western coalitions.

Saudi Arabia is also strengthening its air and missile defences, developing its naval capabilities and deepening defence ties with countries including Turkiye and Pakistan. These efforts have included the “Strategic Mutual Defence Alliance” with Pakistan and the Mecca alliance with Turkiye and Pakistan in August 2026.

What we are witnessing is not the end of the US umbrella, but its shift from a “comprehensive guarantee” to “conditional and limited support”, forcing Gulf states to rethink their collective security.

The Saudi position on industrialised countries’ disregard for supply security

Saudi Arabia now faces one of its most serious security challenges: the Houthis control Bab al-Mandeb, are choking Saudi trade and have already launched drone and missile attacks towards Saudi territory.

Saudi oil exports to Asia fell from around 3.4 million barrels a day in June to just 128,000 in August, before partially recovering to 700,000 this month. Oil prices have meanwhile exceeded $107 a barrel, while the price of a gallon of petrol in the United States has risen by 35 percent.

The real danger is the simultaneous disruption of two maritime chokepoints: Hormuz, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas supplies pass, is almost closed because of the US-Iran war, while Bab al-Mandeb, which accounts for 10-12 percent of global oil, is under Houthi control. Closing both could block about a quarter of global supplies.

Even without complete closure, the continuing threat creates a permanent “risk premium” on prices, according to economic analysts. Although Saudi Arabia benefits in the short term from higher prices, it is strategically harmed by instability because Vision 2030 depends on foreign investment, tourism and stability, not temporary wartime oil revenues.

Riyadh has long played a leading role in stabilising oil markets, frequently using its position as a swing producer to limit volatility. But amid the indifference of industrialised countries to supply security and the threats facing energy sources and routes, Saudi Arabia cannot put aside the dangers to its own security, sovereignty and people for countries that disregard the geopolitics of energy.

For this reason, Saudi Arabia has previously declared that it “will not bear responsibility for any disruptions or shortages in global oil supplies” resulting from Houthi attacks on its oil facilities.

This is more than a warning. It redefines the implicit social contract with its allies: Saudi Arabia is no longer prepared to act as guarantor of last resort for global energy security without something in return.

Its message is that the international community – particularly the major industrialised countries that benefit from oil flows – must share responsibility for protecting maritime routes, rather than leaving Riyadh to bear the cost alone.

‘Collective responsibility’ as a new security doctrine

The Saudi Ministry of Defence reinforced this approach in its statement on the proposed maritime alliance, stressing that “the security of international maritime routes is a collective responsibility that requires effective and sustainable international partnership”.

This is more than a diplomatic appeal. It amounts to a reformulation of the regional security contract: Saudi Arabia is not asking industrialised countries to defend Saudi interests, but to help protect their own interest in the continued flow of oil on which their economies depend.

In July 2026, Saudi Arabia announced a “Multinational Defensive Maritime Alliance” of 14 founding states: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkiye, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Sudan, Djibouti and Somalia.

At least 43 countries and organisations attended the founding meeting in Riyadh. The alliance may mark an important turning point, reflecting an implicit Saudi acknowledgement that the US umbrella is no longer sufficient and that Riyadh must build its own security capabilities with regional allies.

US exposure: A deeper strategic reading

Trump’s statements downplaying the Houthi takeover of Bab al-Mandeb and his refusal to intervene reflect not only a political decision, but a structural weakness in US deterrence.

The United States is unable to manage multiple fronts. Its concentration around the Strait of Hormuz limits its ability to respond in Yemen; fighting has depleted stocks of advanced interceptor missiles; and the unpopularity of the war and approaching congressional elections constrain its freedom of action.

From the perspective of countries in the region, the US military presence in the Gulf is no longer an unconditional security guarantee. The question of whether allies could be abandoned again is pushing decision-makers from Riyadh to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Doha to diversify their security and defence partnerships.

That means deeper defence ties with Turkiye and Pakistan, stronger air and missile defences and naval capabilities, maintaining open channels and seeking risk-reducing understandings with regional powers including Iran, and multinational maritime alliances to protect navigation.

But these alternatives have limits. Can any regional alliance fully compensate for the absence of a major power such as the United States when confronting threats on the scale of Iran and its proxies? US intelligence, logistical and interception capabilities have no regional equivalent, leaving a security gap that cannot quickly be filled.

The new regional order: Towards multipolarity

What we are witnessing is not merely a passing security crisis, but the emergence of a new regional order marked by the decline of unilateral US dominance. The United States is no longer the sole security power in the Gulf, as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkiye and Iran gain weight and Gulf states diversify their partnerships and seek more collective regional security arrangements.

Trump’s response to the Houthi takeover of Bab al-Mandeb is therefore not simply a political position, but a sign of a tectonic shift in the regional security order. The “security-for-oil” formula that governed US-Gulf relations for decades has not formally ended, but it no longer provides the guarantees on which it was built. The US security umbrella remains, but it has become selective, conditional and subject to domestic US calculations unrelated to the interests of the Gulf states.

Saudi Arabia, caught between the hammer of the Houthis at Bab al-Mandeb and the anvil of Iran at the Strait of Hormuz, is pursuing a different approach: insisting that protection of maritime routes become a “collective responsibility” and that it should no longer bear alone the cost of protecting the interests of industrialised countries dependent on its oil.

This position – backed by the announcement of a multinational maritime alliance – marks the beginning of a redefinition of the regional security contract, although significant questions remain over whether ambition can be translated into capability.

Oil prices above $107 a barrel may be only an early sign of what lies ahead. If US exposure continues and regional understandings guaranteeing freedom of navigation remain out of reach, the world could face an energy crisis comparable to those of the 1970s, but without a US security umbrella ready to contain it.

Bab al-Mandeb is therefore more than a maritime strait. It reflects the end of one era and the beginning of another, in which Gulf security is no longer an American gift but a collective responsibility still searching for new arrangements.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, appears to favour a combination of deterrence and avoiding all-out war. Rather than sliding into open-ended attrition, it seeks to support national allies on the ground, enable the Yemeni state to restore its sovereignty, contain the logic of the militia and build a national doctrine that limits external penetration.

Yemen’s stability is no longer a purely Yemeni matter, but a first line of defence for the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb and for the cohesion of the Arab sphere, with Riyadh and Cairo remaining central pillars in confronting projects of disintegration and fragmentation.

Within this emerging order, the Saudi-Egyptian partnership is becoming a cornerstone of regional security. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s expected visit to Cairo and summit with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi give practical expression to the principle of “collective responsibility”.

Riyadh and Cairo recognise that the security of the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb is not a local matter: it is vital to the Suez Canal and Egyptian economy, and forms strategic and security depth for Saudi Arabia.

By coordinating diplomatic and military action, supporting the full liberation of Yemen and containing the reach of the militias, the two countries are helping shape an autonomous regional security order intended to fill the vacuums left by retreating international powers, protect international navigation and confront shared threats from a position of parity and capacity.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Israeli prime minister pledges to advance two bills aimed at addressing the ‘immense damage’ done to Israeli soldiers.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pledged to pass a law that would revoke the citizenship of anyone who defames ⁠Israel’s soldiers, including the directors of NAZA, a documentary about Israeli soldiers’ killings of civilians in Gaza.

Directed by Israeli journalists Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, NAZA documents allegations that mass civilian deaths were built into Israel’s target decisions in its genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza – something Netanyahu and the army reject.

The film won the Special Jury Prize at the Venice Film Festival last week. During his acceptance speech, Abraham said “our country is doing these crimes” and highlighted that Israel is systematically and deliberately targeting Palestinians in Gaza.

“NAZA” takes its title from an Israeli ⁠military term for expected “collateral casualties” and is built around anonymous interviews with intelligence officers and soldiers.

It has been harshly criticised in Israel, with the military examining potential legal action against those involved in it.

But it has also played into the charged domestic political atmosphere before Israel’s October 27 election, as public opinion polls suggest Netanyahu’s ‌right-wing coalition could fall short of a majority in parliament.

On Tuesday, Netanyahu accused several of his election rivals of failing to take a tough stand against the documentary, claiming this made them unfit for office.

On Wednesday, he pledged to advance two bills that he said would address the “immense damage” done to Israeli soldiers in the film.

“The first [order]: To revoke the citizenship of anyone who defames [Israeli] soldiers, and the second: To hit them in their pockets and increase the statutory damages for defamation they can ⁠be sued for by 20 times,” Netanyahu said in a social media video. “We ⁠will hit them both in their pockets and in their citizenship, as their place is not with us.”

Netanyahu cited three examples in proposing the bills: “The recent film NAZA which portrayed [Israeli] officers and soldiers as war criminals”, 2025 remarks by left-wing ex-general-⁠turned-politician Yair Golan that “a sane country does not kill children as a hobby”, and a military legal officer’s 2024 leak of a video showing ⁠soldiers abusing a Gaza detainee.

In 2022, Israel’s Supreme Court passed a law that permits stripping citizenship from Israelis who carry out actions that constitute a breach of trust against the state. Any new legislation would likely face similar court challenges.

More than 73,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians, have been killed in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza since October 2023, according to health authorities.