The Houthis’ war with Saudi Arabia, which appeared to end with a truce in 2022, looks like it’s back on, with the Iran-allied militia recently launching a big attack on Saudi oil infrastructure.
And now, the Houthis have captured a major piece of territory in Yemen.
President Donald Trump meets with President of South Africa Cyril Ramaphosa, Wednesday, May 21, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)
According to The Guardian, the Houthis have gained control of the key Red Sea port of Mocha, which the newspaper described as part of a “concerted drive to take full control of the country’s Red Sea coast.”
The attack on the Saudi oil sites, earlier this week, had led to a spike in oil prices, sending Brent Crude over $100 a barrel for the first time since July, and the seizure of Mocha could mean even more disruption to worldwide oil markets.
Should the Houthis capture the Red Sea coast, the Guardian said, it would represent a “strategic disaster for Saudi Arabia and the US, taking Iran and its proxies closer to full control of two chokepoints for western shipping on opposite sides of the Arabian Peninsula.”
And beyond the oil considerations, the seizure could open a second front in the war, also based upon a crucial Middle East waterway falling under the control of Iran, or an Iran proxy.
As reported by the New York Times, the recent developments indicate that Yemen is heading towards “another full-blown war,” after the first war began in 2014 and continued until a truce eight years later.
“Spiraling Out of Control”
The Guardian quoted the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) as stating that the situation in Yemen was “spiraling out of control, adding that the UN-recognised Yemeni government was opening new fronts against the Houthis in the hope it could put more pressure on the rebels than they could withstand.
“A reduction in hostilities anytime soon seems unlikely, as both sides continue to escalate with the goal of inflicting enough damage to the other side to force a compromise,” Sherwan Hindreen Ali, a Yemen analyst for Acled, told The Guardian.
“In terms of military capability, both sides are more equal compared to the immediate period prior to the 2022 ceasefire when the Houthis had the upper hand.”
The other question raised was whether the Saudis would invoke the Mecca agreement, the mutual defense agreement which they reached just last month with Pakistan and Turkey.
It’s a NATO-style agreement in which the three countries agreed to treat an attack on one as an attack on all. It expands the Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement Saudi Arabia and Pakistan entered into in 2025.
Mixed Signals From Pakistan
Per Reuters, Pakistan has said that no military response has been discussed, following the Houthis’ attacks on Yemen.
Reuters cited a weekly media briefing by foreign ministry spokesperson Sajjad Haider Khan, who stated that a response under the Mecca agreement would be discussed when the “time comes.”
“There is no such thing under discussion right now … When time comes (we) will act under the agreement,” the spokesperson said, per Reuters.
Al Jazeera had reported the day before that Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif had said that the agreement could be “activated” if the Houthis continued to attack Saudi Arabia.
“If there is unprovoked aggression, or a spillover of whatever is happening in Yemen into Saudi Arabia, definitely the Mecca agreement will become operational,” the minister told Pakistani media outlet Geo News.
Reuters also reported separately that Pakistan has warned Iran to “rein in” its Houthi allies following their attacks on Saudi Arabia.
The Guardian had reported that the Mecca pact was “designed to be defensive in nature and believed unlikely to apply to Saudi military activities in Yemen.”
A “Credibility Gap”?
In an analysis earlier this week in War on the Rocks, Doga Eralp, an associate professor of security studies at the Command and Staff College at Marine Corps University, pointed to a possible “credibility gap” with the Mecca agreement.
“Collective-defense pacts are meant to make war less likely.
Poorly designed ones can do the opposite,” Eralp writes. “If allies make sweeping promises without the military integration, decision-making mechanisms, and escalation controls needed to carry them out, they may invite adversaries to test the boundaries of these promises.”
About the Author: Stephen Silver
Stephen Silver is an award-winning journalist, essayist, and film critic, and contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review, and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. For over a decade, Stephen has authored thousands of articles that focus on politics, national security, technology, and the economy. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @StephenSilver, and subscribe to his Substack newsletter.
