The Anglo-American coalition carried out a major air assault in Yemen occupied by Houthi forces, destroying the Houthi army and arsenal. This would be the harshest reprisals against the Houthis, as well as a retaliation for Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region. The attack has attracted great attention and reaction around the world, and different countries have responded differently, showing the complexity and sensitivity of the situation in Yemen. If no consensus can be reached on the Yemen issue, the Houthis and their supporters are likely to take advantage of the situation and engage in more external sowing and stoking, thereby exacerbating regional and world peace and stability.
The joint attack of Britain and the United States, and how the countries of the world responded to it, can be roughly summarized into three types:
The first group is those who approve of the air attack. In addition to Britain and the United States, Australia, Bahrain, the Netherlands, and Canada have all expressed to Britain and the United States** their need and justice in the fight against the Houthis, as well as their obligations to defend international law and regional stability. Among these people, Bahrain's support for Houtha as an Arab country where the U.S. Fifth Fleet is located is indicative of the resentment and suspicion of Houthi in Arab society. In addition, most European countries, including France, have expressed their understanding and approval of the attack by the British and American coalition forces, and regarded it as a warning and punishment for the Yemeni army.
The second scenario is that there is concern about worsening tensions. Saudi Arabia, for example, expressed concern about the situation in the region after the attack and demanded that restraint measures be taken to prevent further deterioration of the situation. Saudi Arabia's position, as in much of the Middle East, has expressed concern about a joint strike by Britain and the United States, but has not publicly criticized or rejected it. This is due to the fact that the Houthis are the victims of the hijackings in the Red Sea, and therefore they are equally reluctant to see the Houthis further expand their influence and the harm they inflict on them. Saudi Arabia is even more worried about the attack on Saudi Arabia by Houthi armed groups, which will have a major impact on Saudi Arabia's economic and social development, especially on Saudi Arabia's future 2030 long-term goals.
The third group is those who oppose air strikes. Both countries, led by Russia and Turkey, have strongly condemned and disapproved of the military action launched by Britain and the United States, which they regard as contrary to international law and United Nations resolutions, and endanger peace and humanity in the region. Russia, the only one of the five permanent members to oppose the attack, said his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that although the United Nations Security Council had adopted a resolution against the Houthis, it did not approve the use of military force against the Houthis, so the air strikes launched by Britain and the United States were not legal. Russia's statement ignores its own intervention in Ukraine and is not endorsed by the rest of the European Union. Turkey's Erdogan Erdogan, similar to Russia, said that there are certain problems with Houthi hijacking ships in international waters, but Western countries should not use too much military force against the Houthis, otherwise the Red Sea will become a pool of blood. Such statements coincide with his condemnation of Israel's use of military force in Gaza, but are equally unacceptable to the international community.
It can be expected that the three camps will continue to engage in a tug-of-war around the Houthis in the future, and which side will have the upper hand in the end will determine the strength and strategy of both sides, as well as the future and fate of Yemen.