The escalation of missile strikes on January 12 by the US and UK on Houthi positions in Yemen marks a significant shift in the Wests engagement strategy. It is a response not just to the direct threat posed by the Houthis but also to the symbolic challenge to the US Navys dominance.
Allowing Houthi attacks to go unchecked could set a dangerous precedent for the US security architecture in the Middle East, potentially emboldening other non-state actors. In this context, the US-UK military response, while addressing the immediate security concern, also feeds into a larger narrative of power contestation in the Middle East.
The Houthis self-identification as part of the "axis of resistance" against the US, Israel, and Western neocolonial interests aligns them ideologically and strategically with Iran. This connection is crucial; it suggests that the conflict in Yemen is a proxy battleground for broader regional power struggles, particularly between Iran and its adversaries like the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. The Houthis reliance on Iranian support - whether ideological, material, or military - further complicates the situation, potentially drawing in greater regional and international involvement.
The escalation of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict after October 7, 2023, has significantly influenced regional dynamics, particularly with the mobilisation of the Ansar Allah movement (Houthis) as a part of the "axis of resistance." It is reported that Israeli airstrikes in Gaza have so far killed more than 24,000 innocent civilians. The Houthis declaration of war on Israel for its genocide in Gaza and subsequent attacks mark a notable expansion of the conflicts geographical scope, extending the warzone from Gaza to a broader Middle Eastern context.
This conflicts evolution shows a strategic calculus by the Houthis, utilising asymmetric warfare tactics. By employing low-cost missiles and UAVs against Israel, they engage in a war of attrition, effectively drawing more resource-intensive responses from technologically superior forces like the US Navy. This tactic not only highlights the Houthis ability to extend their reach but also stresses the financial and logistical aspects of military engagement for Western powers. This disparity could potentially strain the resources of the US and its allies, both financially and in terms of military assets.
Houthis actions and the responses they provoke contribute to a broader narrative of regional power struggles. It reflects the intricate web of alliances and enmities in the Middle East and underscores the multi-dimensional nature of modern warfare, where economic, technological, and traditional military factors intertwine. The involvement of Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and Doha in providing airspace for US and British aircraft for the January 12 attacks reflects a significant geostrategic alignment within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations against the Houthis. Now, the primary concern for these Gulf states is the threat of Houthi attacks on their oil depots and Western military bases, which are not only vital to their economic stability but also pivotal in maintaining regional security dynamics. These assaults might have extensive repercussions, shaking up the international oil markets and intensifying the already growing military strife in the area.
Besides, Irans missile strikes in Iraq and Syria on January 15th, targeting a site allegedly linked to Mossad in Iraq and ISIS positions in Syria, represent a significant escalation in regional tensions. This action, framed as retaliation for the deadly attack in Kerman, reflects Irans assertive stance in projecting power and responding to perceived threats. Irans action shows that the ongoing proxy warfare between the US and Iran in the Middle East is a complex exhibition of asymmetrical and hybrid tactics. Iranian-backed proxies are adept at leveraging such tactics, allowing them to engage effectively against more conventionally powerful foes like US allies. This asymmetry enables these Iranian proxies to sustain operations over an extended period, often with lower resource requirements compared to conventional forces.
For the US, addressing these proxy conflicts presents multifaceted challenges. Morally, the US must navigate the complexities of engaging in regions with high civilian densities and intricate political landscapes. Financially, sustained military engagements demand significant resources, with an ever-present need to justify these expenditures to both domestic and international audiences. Geopolitically, the US faces the challenge of balancing its strategic interests in the region against the risk of further escalation and the potential for broader regional destabilisation. This includes managing relations with key allies and regional partners while countering Iranian influence. Geostrategically, the US must consider the long-term implications of its actions, including the potential for creating power vacuums or inadvertently strengthening extremist groups.
Therefore, the current deadlock in the Middle East represents a critical juncture with far-reaching implications for Israel, the region, and American foreign policy. The stagnation of diplomatic efforts and the escalating pursuit of ammunition by warring parties signal a perilous trajectory towards a broader conflict. This impasse is symptomatic of deeper, underlying issues: historical grievances, ideological divides, and power struggles, both within and between nations in the region. The failure of diplomatic channels to effectively address these root causes has left a vacuum, increasingly filled by military posturing and aggression.
Moreover, the potential for a wider war in the Middle East threatens not just the stability of individual nations but also the strategic balance of the entire region. Such a conflict could draw in major powers, worsening existing tensions and leading to a direct confrontation between regional and global actors with unpredictable consequences. Furthermore, the United States faces a multifaceted dilemma in this scenario. To maintain equilibrium between backing Israel, securing regional stability, and upholding its wider strategic goals demands a sophisticated strategy, something the Biden administration has yet to successfully implement.
From Bangladeshs perspective, a wider war in the Middle East would indeed have profound economic repercussions. The countrys heavy reliance on remittances, which amount to around USD 18 billion annually, predominantly from its large expatriate workforce in the Middle East, underscores the potential vulnerability. A conflict that disrupts these economies or leads to the return of a sizeable portion of this workforce would not only diminish this crucial source of foreign currency but also exacerbate domestic unemployment challenges.
The impact on trade routes is another critical aspect. The Red Sea, a key maritime corridor for Bangladeshs exports to Europe, may become less practical if conflict escalates, leading to higher shipping costs and longer transit times. This would affect the competitiveness of Bangladeshi products in European markets due to increased costs and potential delays.
In response to these challenges, Bangladesh could strategically pivot its economic focus. Exploring ASEAN countries as alternative markets for exports could be a viable strategy. The ASEAN region, with its dynamic economies and growing consumer markets, offers substantial opportunities for Bangladeshi products. Additionally, strengthening its brand presence in South and Southeast Asian markets could help diversify its export destinations and reduce dependency on European markets.
This approach requires a multi-faceted strategy involving trade diplomacy, market research, and adaptation to meet the needs and preferences of these new markets. It also calls for enhancing the competitiveness of Bangladeshi products through quality improvement, innovation, and effective marketing strategies.
While the prospect of a wider Middle Eastern conflict poses significant economic risks for Bangladesh, it also presents an opportunity to recalibrate its international trade strategy, diversify its export markets, and build resilience against global economic shocks. This initiative-taking approach is not just a response to potential crises but a smart strategic move towards sustainable economic growth of Smart Bangladesh.
The writer is a Geopolitical Analyst, Strategic Thinker and Editor at geopolits.com
