Houthi attacks on merchant ships in the Red Sea sparked clashes that lasted more than five hours. According to the Associated Press, a U.S. ship defended itself in this "battle". The Houthis allegedly targeted "Israeli vessels" and claimed that the attack was a response to the calls of the Yemeni people, the Islamic State, and the Palestinian people. Not only Israeli ships were attacked, but also cargo ships of other countries. An Israeli military spokesman revealed that there were two ships unrelated to Israel in the attack. However, a follow-up investigation revealed that one of the ships belonged to the son of Israeli billionaire Abraham Rami Ongar. This finding seems to suggest that Israel may have deliberately downplayed its links to the attacks.
Thus, against this background, the Houthi raid on an Israeli cargo ship seems plausible to a certain extent. However, due to the current "state of war" in which Israel is in a state of war and has repeatedly injured civilians, it seems that it has tacitly assumed that its own civilian units can be attacked. The U.S. side accused the attack of posing a direct threat to international commerce and maritime security, and mentioned assistance to the attacked merchant ship in the "allegations." This shows that the United States is receptive to the attack on the Israeli ship. Although the United States refers to "international commerce" and does not explicitly emphasize Israeli ships, it can be inferred that the United States also believes that Israel should be taught some lessons. There is some controversy in the outside world about the "self-defense" of the US warship.
Some people believe that it is difficult to justify the United States' self-defense at the gates of other countries. At the same time, it was Israeli ships that were attacked, and neither the United States nor the Houthis were among the attacked parties. Therefore, the US escort behavior seems to be illegitimate and more like a "platform" for Israel. Is it justified by the Houthis' frenzied attacks on Israeli ships?I think that this kind of behavior is unreasonable in itself, and it is only because Israel's behavior in the Gaza Strip is more excessive that the Houthi attack seems "justified". To some extent, both are "violent crimes", with the difference that the Houthis are committing "violent robberies" while Israel is committing "violent killings".
Countering violence with violence is not a reasonable approach, yet the Houthis and Hamas seem to have no other way, because Israel refuses to even implement UN resolutions, what "law" can bind them?Is it justified for the Houthis to carry out heavy attacks on Israeli ships?I believe that such behavior is inherently unreasonable, although the Houthi attacks seem "reasonable" in the context of Israel's more excessive actions in the Gaza Strip. From a certain point of view, both are "violent crimes", with the difference that the Houthis are engaged in "violent robberies" while Israel is committing "violent killings".
Countering violence with violence is not a reasonable approach, but the Houthis and Hamas seem to have no choice, because Israel even refuses to implement UN resolutions(Wen Xiaotie).