The Houthi predicament

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

Egypt's announcement of its readiness to support Saudi Arabia placed the Houthi group in the face of a strategic shift that undermines its capabilities for escalation, which it used to impose a fait accompli and expand its influence. The Egyptian position carries a clear message that targeting Arab countries and their capabilities expands the circle of confrontation. Hence, the Houthi message to Cairo reveals the group's fear that the calculations of escalation will turn against it. However, these provocative warnings revealed a glaring paradox. The group, which is escalating its attacks on Saudi Arabia and targeting its vital facilities and airports, warns Egypt against supporting the Kingdom in defending its security! It is the mentality of militias that monopolize the use of force and deny states the right to protect their lands, ignoring that aggression does not grant the aggressor immunity from response. However, what exposed the position of the Houthi militia was the comparison with the reaction of the Yemeni leadership. The head of the Presidential Leadership Council, Rashad Al-Alimi, welcomed Cairo’s solidarity with Riyadh, praising Egyptian-Saudi support for Yemen to restore its institutions, and considered it a pillar of the region’s security and stability. This welcome placed the Egyptian move within a broader framework than confronting the Houthis, and is linked to the right of the Yemenis to restore their state and end the dominance of an armed group that hijacked the national decision and pushed the country into a prolonged conflict. The issue is essentially a struggle over the state: Do its institutions own the decision, or do they remain hostage to a group that imposes its choices with weapons? Here the necessity of distinguishing between defensive intervention and offensive action emerges. If circumstances require Egyptian intervention at a Saudi request and within a constitutional framework, its goal is to protect the Kingdom from attacks, not to wage war on Yemen. Preparing for defense does not mean an automatic decision to send troops or declare open war, but rather setsAttacks face the possibility of a response, the size or timing of which the group cannot determine. But the Houthi message revealed that they want to keep the escalation within limits that serve their goals, without bearing the consequences of the expansion of the confrontation. This is the dilemma of terrorism: imposing a fait accompli and then using the threat to prevent others from confronting it, while the security of states and the rights of peoples remain outside its dictates. The real test now is to transform Arab positions into the ability to deter attacks and support the Yemeni state, while keeping the doors to a political solution open. Egypt is not looking for war, but it refuses for self-restraint to become an excuse to violate the security of its brothers, or for the threats of an armed group to turn into rules governing Arab decisions.