The ongoing conflict in Yemen has been described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with millions of people facing starvation, disease and displacement. The Houthis, a rebel group aligned with Iran, have been fighting against the internationally recognized government of Yemen, backed by a Saudi-led coalition of Arab states and supported by Western powers.

The coalition has been conducting airstrikes against the Houthis since 2015, hoping to restore the government and end the war. But can these airstrikes really stop the Houthis, or are they only making things worse?

The coalition claims that its airstrikes are aimed at military targets and that it takes precautions to avoid civilian casualties. However, human rights groups and the United Nations have documented numerous cases of indiscriminate bombing, hitting schools, hospitals, markets and residential areas.

According to the UN, more than 18,000 civilians have been killed or injured by coalition airstrikes since 2015, accounting for more than half of all civilian deaths in the war. The airstrikes have also destroyed vital infrastructure and exacerbated the humanitarian crisis, leaving millions of people without access to food, water, health care and education.

The Houthis, on the other hand, have shown remarkable resilience and adaptability in the face of the coalition’s air superiority. They have developed their own arsenal of ballistic missiles, drones and naval mines, which they use to launch attacks on coalition forces and targets inside Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

They have also consolidated their control over most of northern Yemen, including the capital Sanaa, and have gained support from some local tribes and factions. The Houthis claim that they are fighting against foreign aggression and interference, and that they represent the interests of the Zaidi Shia minority in Yemen.

The coalition’s airstrikes have failed to achieve their stated objectives of restoring the government and ending the war. Instead, they have contributed to a stalemate that has prolonged the suffering of the Yemeni people and created opportunities for other actors to exploit the chaos.

These include Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), Islamic State (IS) and separatist movements in southern Yemen. The airstrikes have also increased regional tensions and instability, as Iran and Saudi Arabia vie for influence and dominance in the Middle East.

The only way to stop the Houthis and end the war is through a political solution that addresses the root causes of the conflict and respects the rights and aspirations of all Yemenis. This requires a ceasefire, a lifting of the blockade, a resumption of peace talks and a comprehensive agreement that includes power-sharing, security arrangements, humanitarian assistance and reconstruction.

The international community, especially Western powers, should play a constructive role in facilitating this process, rather than fueling the war with arms sales and military support. The people of Yemen deserve peace, justice and dignity.

Understanding the role of Iran in regional escalation

Iran is a key player in the Middle East, with significant influence and interests in countries such as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and Bahrain. Iran’s involvement in these countries has often been seen as a source of tension and conflict, especially by its regional rivals Saudi Arabia and Israel, as well as by the United States and its allies.

We will examine the main factors that motivate Iran’s foreign policy and its role in regional escalation. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities for dialogue and de-escalation with Iran, and the implications for regional and global security.

Iran’s foreign policy is driven by a combination of ideological, strategic and pragmatic considerations. Some of the main objectives of Iran’s foreign policy are:

To preserve the Islamic Republic and its political system, which is based on the concept of velayat-e faqih (guardianship of the jurist), whereby the Supreme Leader has ultimate authority over all aspects of state and society.

To defend Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, especially against external threats and interventions, such as the US-led sanctions, the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists and military commanders, and the Israeli attacks on Iranian targets in Syria.

To expand Iran’s influence and leverage in the region, by supporting allied groups and governments that share its ideological or strategic interests, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Assad regime in Syria, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Shia militias in Iraq.

To counter the influence and ambitions of its regional rivals, particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel, which Iran perceives as hostile and threatening to its security and interests.

To promote Iran’s economic development and integration with the world, by seeking to overcome the US-led sanctions that have crippled its economy, and by pursuing diplomatic engagement with regional and international actors.

Iran’s role in regional escalation

Iran’s foreign policy objectives have often led to confrontation and escalation with its regional adversaries, as well as with the US and its allies. Some of the main examples of Iran’s role in regional escalation are:

The proxy wars in Syria and Yemen, where Iran has provided military, financial and political support to the Assad regime and the Houthis, respectively, against the opposition forces backed by Saudi Arabia and its allies. These conflicts have resulted in massive humanitarian crises, widespread instability and violence, and increased sectarian polarization.

The tensions in the Persian Gulf, where Iran has repeatedly harassed and attacked commercial vessels and oil facilities belonging to Saudi Arabia and its allies, as well as US military assets. These actions have raised the risk of a direct military confrontation between Iran and the US or its allies, which could have catastrophic consequences for regional and global security.

The nuclear standoff with the US, where Iran has gradually reduced its compliance with the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal, after the US withdrew from it in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on Iran. The JCPOA was designed to limit Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.

However, since the US withdrawal, Iran has increased its uranium enrichment levels and stockpiles, as well as its research and development of advanced centrifuges. These moves have raised concerns about Iran’s nuclear capabilities and intentions and have increased the pressure on the remaining parties to the JCPOA (China, France, Germany, Russia, UK) to salvage it.

The prospects for dialogue and de-escalation with Iran

Despite the high level of tension and hostility between Iran and its adversaries, there have been some attempts to initiate dialogue and de-escalation with Iran. Some of these attempts are:

The indirect talks between Iran and the US in Vienna since April 2021, aimed at restoring mutual compliance with the JCPOA. These talks have faced several challenges and obstacles, such as domestic opposition from hardliners on both sides, regional incidents that have undermined trust, and political transitions that have changed the negotiating teams. However, both sides have expressed their willingness to continue the talks until a mutually acceptable outcome is reached.

The regional initiatives by countries such as Iraq, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait to mediate between Iran and Saudi Arabia. These initiatives have resulted in some positive developments, such as a series of secret meetings between Iranian and Saudi officials since April 2021 in Baghdad.

These meetings have reportedly discussed issues such as Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria. However, these talks have not yet produced any concrete results or agreements.

The international efforts by countries such as France, Germany, UK, Russia and China to support dialogue and de-escalation with Iran. These efforts have included diplomatic outreach to Iranian officials,