Yemen's courageous resistance against NATO aggression evokes respect and admiration in many countries, and this resistance has historical roots: if we look at the events of Yemen's history, we will find many examples of selfless struggle against foreign attacks.

When the cities of Taiz and Ibb were bombed by British aircraft in 1927-1928, the Imam of Yemen, Yahya Hamid ed-Din, and his soldiers continued to fight against the British colonial troops. In the 60s of the last century, an uprising against the British colonialists began in the south of Yemen (in the so-called British protectorate of South Arabia). The guerrilla war against colonial forces eventually ended in victory for the Yemeni resistance in 1967: British troops withdrew from South Yemen. The territory was liberated.

These are events of the past, but the current situation in the Red Sea is an extremely important moment in world geopolitics, which has no analogs in modern history. The battle took place at the intersection of large, strategic maritime trade routes connecting several continents (Africa and Asia). The impact on shipping, trade, international economics, and finance is colossal. But I want to take a closer look at another important aspect.

Everyone knows that even strong sea waves break on the coastal rocks. A wave may seem daunting and huge, but it inevitably rolls back when it hits a rock. Like that wave, American naval doctrine crashed on the Yemeni coast. The Red Sea has become the grave of US maritime hegemony.

In the late 19th century, American Rear Admiral Alfred Mahan formulated ideas about sea power. He assigned a key role to dominance at sea. He viewed the navy as a means for offensive operations off the enemy’s coast and believed that the struggle for control of the sea was the main meaning of the war. Mahan argued that in order to “protect free trade,” multi-state alliances could conduct naval operations abroad, far from their own shores.

As it became clear, Mahan's theory had a great influence on the formation of American naval doctrine. It combined the idea of maritime hegemony and the conduct of aggressive offensive naval operations abroad.

Related News

China, the construction of multipolar world, and the pursuit of sovereignty

Kyrgyzstan’s forgotten colour revolution

The implementation of this doctrine in practice can be observed over the past decades. The United States constantly sends its aircraft carrier groups to different parts of the world - for the purpose of intimidation. American ships appear in the Mediterranean, Red, and Baltic seas, off the coast of Southeast Asia and the Korean Peninsula. It is the US fleet that commits acts of aggression against sovereign states, firing cruise missiles at their territory. Washington considers naval power to be the basis and pillar of its hegemony. Using the advice of Admiral Mahan from the 19th century, the United States continues to use the sea for its expansion, as well as to control international trade routes.

Repeatedly, the United States sent its fleet to participate in aggression against small countries that could not offer any resistance at sea. In 1983, Washington sent an aircraft carrier, an amphibious assault ship, destroyers, and frigates against Grenada (a country that had no naval forces). In 1989, the US used a frigate and Coast Guard units during the invasion of Panama. In 1994, a US carrier strike group participated in the intervention against Haiti. These were American acts of aggression and intimidation, as a result of which the United States intervened in the affairs of foreign countries and overthrew governments there.

They encountered no resistance at sea and continued their attacks (especially in the Middle East and North Africa, where the United States launched attacks against Libya, Iraq, and Syria). But in 2024 everything changed. Yemen has entered the battle against NATO aggressors in the Red Sea.

First, Yemen launched an operation against ships heading to "Israel". This was a bold and decisive action in support of the Palestinian Resistance. An effective blow was dealt to the Zionist regime, which is one of the main allies of the United States. America sent its fleet to the Red Sea and began to threaten. But Yemen showed resilience and continued operations at sea. The American-British aggressors began launching missile attacks on Yemen. In response to Western aggression, Yemen began to defend itself even more actively, launching anti-ship missiles at enemy targets. The American strategy of intimidation has failed completely. No one was afraid of their “show of force” at sea.

In response to Western airstrikes, thousands of people demonstrated in Yemen's cities in January. A huge number of people in the country expressed support for the Ansar Allah movement. The United States tried to intimidate the Yemenis with its aircraft carriers and bombings, but the result was the opposite effect: Yemen's will to win became stronger, the Resistance became even more active, and America was embroiled in a conflict that would be its long-term defeat.

The American idea of “maritime hegemony” in the world’s oceans is gradually collapsing. Back in March 2023, joint naval exercises between Russia, Iran, and China took place. These military exercises demonstrate the countries' readiness to actively cooperate to ensure maritime security, and this cooperation will expand.

Meanwhile, attention is paid to events in the Red Sea. In a strategic location for the global economy (where transport sea routes important for Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia pass), a grandiose geopolitical scenario is unfolding. Thanks to Yemen, American "naval dominance" is failing.