Red Sea and the Houthis threat

[Big_Zucchini]

The connection was made by the Houthis themselves when they declared which ships they would attack. They didn't attack ships at random...

Yes of course they would prioritize Israeli ships if at all. My question was a bit deeper - what interest, beyond the shallow "just read their manifesto" argument, do they have in this?
They have enough brain power to control half a country and have Iran entrust them with strategic weaponry. So they're not going to be entirely driven by emotions.

I do believe I understand their interests here. At least some of them. I'm just trying to get @Ananda to explain what he meant by saying "Israel-created mess" when referring to Egypt's much reduced Suez tax revenue.

 

[Ananda]

fail to see the connection between the Houthi issue and the war in Gaza. What is it, really? They wish to gain something financially? Politically? Militarily?

Because you fail to see how Arab street react to indiscriminately bombing of civilians in Gaza. Because you fail to see pro Palestinian not means pro Hamas as Israel try to sell the world.

For that you will always fail to connect why Arab governments will not going to put their military for any action that their street will see helping Israel cause. As sitting in the fence, means they are not commiting militarily to any side. Diplomatically off course different things.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Because you fail to see how Arab street react to indiscriminately bombing of civilians in Gaza. Because you fail to see pro Palestinian not means pro Hamas as Israel try to sell the world.

Not only do I not fail to see the sentiment on the Arab street - I actually addressed it already:

Now we probably get the most tangible piece of evidence of the middle eastern regimes' destructive policy actually costing them billions of dollars annually and their own sovereignty (aside from the constant wars but those are government-driven actions, not people-driven).
Between the 40's and 70's they pushed the line that Jews must be annihilated. Then they pushed the line that Israel must be destroyed and a Palestine be formed in its ashes.
And now they can't even protect themselves against a de facto naval blockade because the overly radicalized population can no longer be de-radicalized in any reasonable amount of time.

So if you choose to answer as you do - at least bother to read the post.

 

[Ananda]

only do I not fail to see the sentiment on the Arab street - I actually addressed it already:

I've read your post, and clearly you're not only fail to see the sentiment or Arab Street, but distorted it as simply 'radicalisation'. For that I clearly say you still fail to see the nature of emotional level of Arab Street.

If you are understand that, then you will not talk of failing to see the connection of Houthi action to Gaza War.

fail to see the connection between the Houthi issue and the war in Gaza

For that you will always going to fail to see why the Arabs government not going to involve with Western actions against Houthi in Red Sea. They are not going to involve on any operation against their street emotions.That's clearly what I have put it on my posts. Seems you are the one that not bother to read other posts.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

I've read your post, and clearly you're not only fail to see the sentiment or Arab Street, but distorted it as simply 'radicalisation'. For that I clearly say you still fail to see the nature of emotional level of Arab Street.

If you are understand that, then you will not talk of failing to see the connection of Houthi action to Gaza War.



For that you will always going to fail to see why the Arabs government not going to involve with Western actions against Houthi in Red Sea. They are not going to involve on any operation against their street emotions.That's clearly what I have put it on my posts. Seems you are the one that not bother to read other posts.

I do understand Arab sentiment. But there is no point ignoring that it is the result of decades of indoctrination which in turn led to radicalization. The governments of the past saw it as a tool. Today they live with the consequences of having populations too radicalized to properly pursue their interests with the west.

The Houthi attacks on global shipping and its previous attacks on Israel's cities are two things that by themselves are not related to Gaza. To attribute those to Hamas's 7/10 attack is superficial at best. While middle eastern governments know how to make a display of support, they know better how to oppress their own people.
Iran itself did not conduct any attack on Israel and it's fine. Hezbollah limited itself to border skirmishes, with clear interests such as to pin down Israeli forces in the north and prevent reinforcement in Gaza.

The Houthis could pledge a couple child soldiers to attack through Syria. Instead they opted for ballistic missile attacks on Israel. That in itself would suffice, but they also chose to escalate by disrupting global shipping. This could not be explained by "public sentiment".
If Iran tells the Houthis to sit - they sit. If it tells them to jump - they jump. If it tells them to stay put and take a PR hit at home - they stay put and kill a couple more dissidents.

 

[Ananda]

But there is no point ignoring that it is the result of decades of indoctrination which in turn led to radicalization.

It is same thing with Israel population. Israel can say they're democracy and no indoctrination. However when children of Israel learn song to glorified their military toward Palestinian, being told from childhood that Palestinian is going to kill you. Similar thing happened to Palestinians that face attack not only from Israel securities but also settlers. Indoctrination happen in Israel and Arab words. Israel also live on that indoctrination consequences. Israel also wasted billion of dollars for political driven projects to keep some factions in power. Or do you really believe that's not what Netanyahu right wingers done now.

That's why there will be no full normalisation in ME, when Palestinian Issue not solve. No matter some in West and Israel hope the Arabs will overide this issue and accept those Palestinians resettle in Arab Neighbors territory. That's the dream that many Israel has, and don't tell me it is not results from indoctrination since decades ago. So don't talk as only Arab that has this problem.

The Houthi attacks on global shipping and its previous attacks on Israel's cities are two things that by themselves are not related to Gaza.

Everyone can have their own opinion, you as Israel side can have this one believe also. However those in Arab side and those who supports Palestinian side simply will not believe this kind of arguments. Houthi clearly use the attack related to Gaza War, no matter your side believe other wise. Whether they're doing it on Iran orders or not, doesn't matter for most Arab Street.

That's 'again' why the Arab government doesn't want to take the risk in further ignite their street emotions. They don't want to have another Arab Spring, simply because the West and Israel hoping for them to take actions against Houthi in Red sea. That's Israel mess, let the West handle that. Clearly that's the massage the Arab government give to the US and UK, on why they are not going to get involved in Red sea with Houthi.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

@Ananda Literally none of that adressed my questions.
Maybe. Maybe public opinion is what really drives Arab national policies. Maybe any other factor is so far behind. I'm just not convinced.

 

[Rob c]

Both sides have deeply imbedded beliefs that they are the rightful occupiers of the land . The Palestinians believe that the land was stolen from them by the Israelis in 1948, and the Israelis believe that this is their traditional home land and it is rightfully theirs. Both sides are indoctrinated in this belief and there are radicals on both sides who want to push this to an extreme. There is no easy answer to this and to de-radicalize both sides will take generations, if it can be achieved at all.

 

[Ananda]

Literally none of that adressed my questions.

It's definitely answer the questions on why The Arabs stay out on any operations against the Houthi action in Red Sea. You just don't agree with the answer, because it is against many on Israel side logics.

 

[Meriv90]

Both sides have deeply imbedded beliefs that they are the rightful occupiers of the land . The Palestinians believe that the land was stolen from them by the Israelis in 1948, and the Israelis believe that this is their traditional home land and it is rightfully theirs. Both sides are indoctrinated in this belief and there are radicals on both sides who want to push this to an extreme. There is no easy answer to this and to de-radicalize both sides will take generations, if it can be achieved at all.

I'm sorry but can we please separate the the Zionist question from the WW2 and the resulting 1948 decisions?

Zionism migration started 50 years before, and Zionist violence (Irgun) started way before the creation of Israel. The Nabka wasn't something new or that came out unsurprising.

Zionist political violence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And it is a continuum of violence from the the rejected Uganda scheme and thus start of the colonies in Palestine to Rabin homicide.

P.s. And I'm consistent, the same happened with the Burmese when the British moved in whom now gets called Rohingya. It doesn't matter the religion of the colonizer, as a latin-american, colonialism will always be a crime. What Israel is doing is even sadder considering that for years the left ideal, my ideals, were exactly the Kibbutz community way of life.

 

[Rob c]

I'm sorry but can we please separate the the Zionist question from the WW2 and the resulting 1948 decisions?

Zionism migration started 50 years before, and Zionist violence (Irgun) started way before the creation of Israel.

I don't think that you can as it is all part of were we are today. In 1945 the Jewish population was about a third of the population of Palestine and it was the Nazi treatment of the Jews which lead to an upsurge in support for the European Jewish wish to emigrate and through the UN the formation of the state of Israel.

Village Statistics, 1945 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

The solution by the UN was in my opinion unworkable due to the already rising tensions between different extreme groups on both sides and the inability of non extremist and the UN(who controlled the mandate at this point) to control the more militant groups, including outside groups and countries in check.

 

[Feanor]

Yes of course they would prioritize Israeli ships if at all. My question was a bit deeper - what interest, beyond the shallow "just read their manifesto" argument, do they have in this?
They have enough brain power to control half a country and have Iran entrust them with strategic weaponry. So they're not going to be entirely driven by emotions.

I do believe I understand their interests here. At least some of them. I'm just trying to get @Ananda to explain what he meant by saying "Israel-created mess" when referring to Egypt's much reduced Suez tax revenue.

Two separate questions. One is what this has to do with Hamas. It has to do that the Houthis are engaging in open military action against shipping to and from Israel in support of Hamas. The other is the question of their motivation. The latter I'm not really sure on. My best guess is that Iran is pulling the string here, but my guess isn't worth much. I don't know the region or the parties all that well.

 

[Meriv90]

They were just 3% of the population in 1898 when they decided to mass migrate as said after the Uganda scheme was rejected at their, if I remember correctly, their 6th Zionism meeting.

So taking the figure of 30% is wrong because it is already after the colonization started.

It is like saying the % of polish Jews in 1945 was 45.000 and based on that number (after the crime that was the Holocaust Genocide) take a decision.

No at the moment the Zionism took the decision to move in they were just 3% of the population.

Plus another reason to disconnect the creation of Israel from the WW2 is that Israel is by majority Sephardic and not Askenazy (sorry if the spelling is wrong).

Making the colonial perpetrator a different ethnic group (in the same religious group) than the one that suffered the Holocaust.

80% of Sephardic Jews live in Israel only 20% of Askenazy Jews live in Israel right now.

Reducing Israel to WW2 is oversiplyfing, it's s like for Nazism forgetting about Karl Luger

Karl Lueger - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Or not considering the Dreyfur affaire. Dreyfus affair - Wikipedia

Zionism started a hundred years before WW2 and we must consider all it's history to judge it. When they started coming in they were 3% of the population.

 

[Feanor]

They were just 3% of the population in 1898 when they decided to mass migrate as said after the Uganda scheme was rejected at their, if I remember correctly, their 6th Zionism meeting.

So taking the figure of 30% is wrong because it already after the colonization started.

It is like saying the % of polish Jews in 1945 was 45.000 and based on that number (after the crime that was the Holocaust Genocide) take a decision.

No at the moment the Zionism took the decision to move in they were just 3% of the population.

Plus another reason to disconnect the creation of Israel from the WW2 is that Israel is by majority Sephardic and not Askenazy (sorry if the spelling is wrong).

Making the colonial perpetrator a different ethnic group (in the same religious group) than the one that suffered the Holocaust.

80% of Sephardic Jews live in Israel only 20% of Askenazy Jews live in the Israel right now.

Reducing Israel to WW2 is oversiplyfing, is life for Nazism forgetting about Karl Luger

Karl Lueger - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Or not considering the Dreyfur affaire. Dreyfus affair - Wikipedia

Zionism started a hundred years before WW2 and we must consider all it's history to judge it. When they started coming in they were 3% of the population.

I don't think that you can as it is all part of were we are today. In 1945 the Jewish population was about a third of the population of Palestine and it was the Nazi treatment of the Jews which lead to an upsurge in support for the European Jewish wish to emigrate and through the UN the formation of the state of Israel.

Village Statistics, 1945 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

The solution by the UN was in my opinion unworkable due to the already rising tensions between different extreme groups on both sides and the inability of non extremist and the UN(who controlled the mandate at this point) to control the more militant groups, including outside groups and countries in check.

A few issues. First off this is wildly off-topic. Second off this is extremely close to a political discussion on the history of Israel. 1) please take this to a relevant thread, start one if you have to, and 2) please be careful that this remains relevant to defense and geo-strategic issues. This is not the forum to relitigate Middle Eastern migration questions.

 

[Meriv90]

Then going back on topic on why there is no Arab intervention
Source:

Arab Public Opinion about the Israeli War on Gaza

The Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies announced the results of the public opinion poll regarding the Israeli war on Gaza on Wednesday 10 January 2024

www.dohainstitute.org

Here we can see the support to the 07 criminal operation

I imagine we can suppose that 63% is even higher on houti controlled territory.

@Meriv90 Source required for image. Posters shouldn't have to go hunting through various websites to find it. You have been on here long enough to know the rules.

Ngatimozart.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

It's definitely answer the questions on why The Arabs stay out on any operations against the Houthi action in Red Sea. You just don't agree with the answer, because it is against many on Israel side logics.

I didn't ask, at any point, why the Arab nations stay out. The closest thing I asked is what would constitute them NOT staying out, and which nations you referred to. My main question was why did you label the Houthi actions as a retaliation against Israel.

It's also quite annoying that you label me as "Israeli side" as if the people of Israel have no agency, instead just one homogenous group. For the sake of symmetry, is there any particular "side" or "group" you'd like me to associate you to?

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Both sides have deeply imbedded beliefs that they are the rightful occupiers of the land . The Palestinians believe that the land was stolen from them by the Israelis in 1948, and the Israelis believe that this is their traditional home land and it is rightfully theirs. Both sides are indoctrinated in this belief and there are radicals on both sides who want to push this to an extreme. There is no easy answer to this and to de-radicalize both sides will take generations, if it can be achieved at all.

Since this is incredibly political and unrelated to the topic, I won't give a full answer. I will just say that at least as far as it goes about Israeli society - this assessment is wrong.
The popular approach of "both-side-ism" is generally harmful to objective assessment of any given situation. Even if you apply symmetry at first for the sake of balance, the conclusion itself cannot be symmetrical otherwise this implies a wrong methodology.
The voluntarily accepted norms and values since WW2 have created this reality.

If you'd like to further discuss this, DM me.

 

[koxinga]

@Ananda Literally none of that adressed my questions.
Maybe. Maybe public opinion is what really drives Arab national policies. Maybe any other factor is so far behind. I'm just not convinced.

If we put aside the simple arguments of Muslim solidarity and sympathy, my guess is a combination of "useful bogeyman" for the internal audience of the Houthis and to increase their international profile among with Muslim nations.

It is easy for countries to express "anger" and support for the Palestinians. Cheap to get the masses to wear keffiyeh and wave flags, quite another thing to get directly involved militarily. Watching Anwar Ibrahim (PM of Malaysia) hyperventilating at a pro-Palestinian rally makes me think politicians just being politicians to try to score their local votes by being the defender of Gazans.

 

[Meriv90]

But if you are already in a proxy war to step in isn't that costly, you already paid the "entrance cost."

Yes US raids aren't Saudi Raids but the Houtis were already at war.

For that reason it was easier for the houti leadership start the scenario while even with way bigger support in Jordan no one would dream of moving a finger.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

But if you are already in a proxy war to step in isn't that costly, you already paid the "entrance cost."

Yes US raids aren't Saudi Raids but the Houtis were already at war.

For that reason it was easier for the houti leadership start the scenario while even with way bigger support in Jordan no one would dream of moving a finger.

I do believe there is a significant cost the Houthis paid already.
First, the attacks on Israel and the attempted naval blockade of the red sea are not directly related. These are 2 distinct sets of action.
What did they pay by firing on Israel? Israel utilizes the new situation to bolster its coverage capabilities (partly a political/financial struggle) and the issue of Yemen has already gained its proportional level of relevance in the Israeli public's eyes.
What did they pay by blockading the red sea? Attacks by a western coalition against their strategic assets, and showcasing to the west the extent of their capabilities regarding area denial.