The UK’s involvement in the bombing campaign against Yemen has revealed its weakened military capabilities. I will analyze how the UK’s role in the Yemen war has exposed its lack of strategic vision, operational readiness and diplomatic influence. I will also discuss the implications of this situation for the UK’s security and global standing.
The UK has been supporting the Saudi-led coalition in its intervention in Yemen since 2015, providing weapons, intelligence and logistical support. The coalition aims to restore the internationally recognized government of President Hadi, who was ousted by the Houthi rebels in 2014. However, the war has resulted in a humanitarian catastrophe, with more than 230,000 deaths, millions displaced and facing famine, and widespread violations of human rights and international law.
The UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has been controversial and criticized by many, including some of its own MPs, human rights groups and the UN. The main arguments against the UK’s involvement are that it is fueling the conflict, worsening the humanitarian crisis, undermining its credibility as a champion of human rights and international law, and risking complicity in war crimes.
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 16 (Feb 10 – May 3, 2025) opens registrations; register today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
Moreover, the UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has exposed its diminished military strength. The UK has relied heavily on its alliance with the US and Saudi Arabia, without having a clear strategy or objective of its own. The UK has also faced operational challenges, such as a shortage of pilots, aircraft and munitions, and a lack of oversight and accountability for its actions. The UK has also failed to exert any meaningful diplomatic influence on the parties involved in the conflict, or to promote a peaceful resolution.
The implications of this situation are serious for the UK’s security and global standing. The UK’s involvement in the Yemen war has increased its vulnerability to terrorist attacks, as well as alienated some of its allies and partners in the region and beyond. The UK’s diminished military strength has also eroded its credibility and influence as a global power, especially in light of its withdrawal from Afghanistan and its strained relations with the EU after Brexit.
The UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has revealed its weakened military capabilities. The UK has been supporting a war that is not in its national interest, that is causing immense human suffering, and that is damaging its reputation and role in the world. The UK should reconsider its involvement in the Yemen war, and instead focus on strengthening its military capabilities, pursuing a coherent and ethical foreign policy, and promoting peace and stability in the region.
Iran Strikes Back: A New Escalation in the Regional Conflict
On January 20, 2024, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched a series of missile attacks against targets in Iraq and Syria, as well as a cross-border raid against a Pakistani-based militant group.
These operations were carried out in retaliation for a deadly terror attack in Kerman, Iran, on January 18, which killed 27 people and wounded dozens more. The attack was claimed by the Islamic State (ISIS), which has been trying to reassert its presence in the region after losing most of its territory and leadership.
The IRGC said that its missiles hit “the headquarters and gathering centers of the Takfiri terrorists” in Iraq’s Kurdistan region and Syria’s Deir ez-Zor province, where ISIS remnants have been operating. The IRGC also said that it targeted “the main base of the terrorist group Jaish al-Adl” in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, which has been behind several attacks on Iranian security forces and civilians in recent years.
The Iranian strikes were met with condemnation and warnings from the governments of Iraq, Syria, and Pakistan, as well as the United States and its allies. They accused Iran of violating their sovereignty and territorial integrity, and of escalating the already tense situation in the region. They also expressed concern about the potential for further violence and instability, especially as Iran is preparing for its presidential election in June.
Iran, however, defended its actions as legitimate self-defense and deterrence against the threats posed by ISIS and other terrorist groups. It also blamed the United States and its allies for supporting and enabling these groups, and for failing to prevent their activities. Iran also warned that it would not hesitate to respond to any aggression or provocation from its enemies.
The Iranian strikes mark a new level of escalation in the regional conflict that has been simmering for years. Iran has been engaged in a proxy war with Saudi Arabia and its allies, who accuse Iran of meddling in their internal affairs and supporting various militias and movements across the region. Iran has also been facing increasing pressure from the United States and Israel, who have imposed crippling sanctions on Iran and carried out covert operations and assassinations against Iranian officials and scientists.
The Iranian strikes also raise questions about the future of the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and the world powers, which has been hanging by a thread since the United States withdrew from it in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on Iran.
The remaining parties to the deal have been trying to salvage it and bring the United States back into compliance, but their efforts have been hampered by mutual mistrust and political obstacles. The Iranian strikes could further complicate the diplomatic process and jeopardize the prospects for a peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue.
The Iranian strikes demonstrate that Iran is not willing to back down or compromise on its regional interests and ambitions, despite the economic hardship and international isolation it faces. They also show that Iran is capable of striking back at its enemies with precision and force, despite their superior military and technological advantages.
However, they also carry significant risks and costs for Iran, as they could invite more retaliation and confrontation from its adversaries and alienate potential partners and mediators. The Iranian strikes could thus trigger a spiral of violence and escalation that could engulf the whole region in a wider war.