Recent weeks, Tehran's bet

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

I see that the Houthi escalation against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia represents an Iranian bet on the remaining days of the American midterm elections. Striking airports and threatening oil installations cannot be explained by the Yemeni conflict alone. There are those who want the cost of these attacks to reach the pocket of the American voter, so he enters the polling station angrily, and gives the opponents of the Republican Party a majority that restricts the president in the second half of his term. We heard more than one official in Tehran repeating the saying: “If we do not export our oil, no one will export oil in the region!” Clear presumption!

The election takes place on November 3, less than three weeks away. It falls in the middle of the four years of the presidency. Voters renew the entire House of Representatives, numbering 435 members, and about a third of the Senate. They do not elect a new president, but they decide whether the president will work with a majority that supports or opposes him. The loss of the majority hinders legislation and spending policy, without stripping the president of foreign policy powers.

Energy is the key here. The American citizen who finds gasoline more expensive and pays more for his daily needs will not necessarily read the details of the conflict in the Middle East. He will hold those who rule him accountable. This, in my opinion, is what Tehran is counting on. Reducing supplies raises prices, and their rise weakens the ruling party, and its weakness gives it additional time to survive. An account that seems tempting to someone who is accustomed to interpreting things as he desires the direction of his project.

The Kingdom is a main target in this account. It is the largest oil exporter in the region, and has an east-west line, which transports oil to Red Sea ports, bypassing the Strait of Hormuz. The UAE has another port through Fujairah. However, the size of Saudi supplies gives them special weight in compensating for the shortfall. Whoever attacks its facilities wants to disrupt this role, and make consumers pay the bill for his threat to the sea lanes.

Here we can understand the coincidence between the attack on Saudi Arabia and the Houthi attempt to tighten its grip on Bab al-Mandab. When the Hormuz threat loses some of its effectiveness, what is required is to control Bab al-Mandab. When this failed and the chances of disrupting navigation in the southern Red Sea decreased, Al-Houthi, Iranian weapons experts, and Hezbollah turned towards the Kingdom, which defends the continued flow of oil to the world, and its civilian institutions were targeted.

Al-Houthi plays a role in this equation, and he, of course, has his own ambition in Yemen. But what guarantees him that Tehran will stick to him when he offers him a deal that allows him to stay? nothing. I fear that he will discover too late that the weapons he received from Tehran do not make him a partner in the decision. Its need for him may end, while the Yemenis remain alone in facing the devastation that his adventures left in their country.

Trump, in turn, tried to mitigate the cost of recent weeks. He announced arrangements regarding Russian energy and increasing diesel supplies, and I see this as an attempt to calm the market before the Americans vote. Its success depends on rapid implementation and the arrival of shipments. It is not enough to announce an agreement for the price to drop at gas stations the next morning, but the electoral motivation behind the urgency is understandable.

What I think is missing from Tehran's calculation is that the Republicans' loss, if it happens, does not mean its victory. The president, who may be constrained by an opposition majority at home, may retain broad ability to move externally. Democrats may disagree with him regarding the means of dealing with Iran, without accepting its blackmail of the world. Describing him as a “lame duck” summarizes a more complex situation and gives the Iranian leadership reassurance that is not based on a guarantee.

Moreover, those affected by the energy threat are not only America's voters. Industrialized countries, developing economies, and consumers far from the region pay the price. I am not saying that the world has agreed to overthrow the Iranian regime, but I am saying that the expansion of the damage makes tolerating Iran's behavior more costly. The escalation aimed at dividing the opponents may lead to a convergence of their positions and an expansion of joint action to curb it.

In my opinion, Al-Houthi made two mistakes: attacking the kingdom, and threatening Bab al-Mandab. The first targets a country with broad interests and partnerships, and the second touches on a corridor that the world needs. This expands the circle of confrontation with him, and makes it more difficult to overcome his danger. He may score a military hit here or there, but the image does not tell his audience what this adventure will cost.

As for the Yemenis who got rid of the imamate more than half a century ago, they have the right to a state that does not grant a group a divine mandate to rule. There is widespread Yemeni resistance to this project, even if it is weakened by divisions. Supporting Yemen requires gathering the forces that reject the coup around a state and citizenship, not leaving them to fight among themselves while the Houthis impose their authority with weapons. The disagreement with this project relates to the right of countries to stability, the right of their people to development, and the right of Yemenis to a school, hospital, and work.

We in the Gulf do not have the luxury of waiting for Tehran's mistakes. The Kingdom's security is the security of all of us, and protecting its facilities and corridors is a direct Gulf interest. What is required is serious defense coordination, political action that brings together allies, and media that clearly explains what is happening to the people. Our preparedness should not depend on who wins in Washington. Elections are an American matter, but protecting our societies and our development experience is our duty. We perform it with our friends, and we begin with ourselves. The last words: The results of the American elections may change, but Tehran’s predicament is deeper than an election ballot!

Quoted from "Asharq Al-Awsat"