'Prosperity Guardian': 'Godawful name, unnecessary coalition'- Analyst

By Al Mayadeen English
Source: Social media
19 Dec 2023 14:35
6 Shares

Military analyst Patrick Fox shares his takeaways from the recent launch of US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian, politically analyzed in this piece.

This Nov. 12, 2018 photo shows the USS Carney in the Mediterranean Sea. (AP)

The US military recently launched a new coalition in the Red Sea, called "Operation Prosperity Guardian," under the guise of securing maritime trade routes. The United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles, and Spain will be among the countries jointly working with the Pentagon under the coalition.

Given the context, Patrick Fox, a military analyst, has taken to X to note his takeaways.

Initial Operation "Prosperity Guardian" Takeaways:
1. Godawful operational name.
2. Militarily unnecessary coalition, given US assets already on station relative to the threat.
3. Some noticeably absent NATO nations not participating - Turkey is the obvious one, but Greece isn't… pic.twitter.com/NVNtdjY2bP
— Patrick Fox (@RealCynicalFox) December 19, 2023

First, he deemed the coalition "militarily unnecessary", as the US already stationed military frigates in the Red Sea to counter the threats the Yemeni Armed Forces posed.

This prompts the speculation of the US aiming to turn the Red Sea into a warzone to protect Israeli interests rather than simply "keep strategic waterways safe" as US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin claimed.

Fox saw the operation as a lengthy, time-wasting process. He drew out the necessary steps to be taken before the official launching of operations, such as assembling forces, setting the return on equity scale that suits each participating country, and establishing the hierarchy that would be heeded, all of which undermine the agility of the operation.

That is unless the US decides to kickstart the operation on its own, reeling back to the coalition being militarily unnecessary in the first place.

NATO preoccupied with Russia-Ukraine

Fox noted the absence of significant NATO members, such as Turkey, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, and Romania. Romania was regarded to have very limited use in the coalition as its frigates have not been modernized and thus cannot be effectively utilized.

Germany also opted to abstain from participation, considering the extensive issues its navy has been experiencing for years. Germany has also been in central conflicts with countries in the Middle East, firstly due to their continuous support of the genocide in Gaza and second due to the strained relations with Turkey. Just in November, the president of Germany's Central Council of Jews said the Turkish President is "no partner" of Germany.

Poland and Baltic countries are also absent due to heavy involvement in the Ukraine-Russia war, along with the rest of NATO member countries.

During a speech at a summit of the Visegrad Group, an informal political club that includes the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia, Czech President Petr Pavel echoed Central Europe's support of Ukraine, as NATO views Russia as the biggest threat in Europe and is currently preparing for a major conflict, according to Pavel.

Pavel noted that he does not believe his counterparts have a differing view on the war in Ukraine, saying, “We’ve all agreed that it is in our imminent interest that Ukraine succeed,” as he called aiding Ukraine a “naturally human step.”

Implications from Arab absence

Fox also highlighted the absence of all Middle Eastern countries except for Bahrain, nudging at the perception of being affiliated with any pro-Israeli movements and the backlash it might relay, particularly among Arab countries.

He noted that Egypt's absence could very potentially affirm the theory, considering the substantial losses it has seen as maritime disruptions affect transits going through the Suez Canal.

In the same sphere, these countries' choice to abstain from participating in the coalition could also indicate hesitation in crossing Iran, amid its strong condemnation of anti-Palestinian sentiments, especially across Arab and Islamic countries.

According to the official Iranian Student News Agency (ISNA) on Thursday, Iran's Defense Minister Mohammad Reza Ashtiani declared that the suggested US-backed multinational task force to allegedly protect shipping in the Red Sea is due to find itself facing "extraordinary problems".

"If they make such an irrational move, they will be faced with extraordinary problems," Ashtiani said, without specifying what actions would be taken in response to the US move.

Is the UAE a shadow participant?

The Wall Street Journal reported that US officials tried to secure the support of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, the two main players in the Yemeni civil war. The two countries have opted to stay out for now as they are long at odds over how to deal with the Yemeni Armed Forces.

Riyadh supports a more balanced approach, fearing severe retaliation from Sanaa, as seen in previous years, particularly with the attacks on Aramco in 2019 - which disrupted half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production after targeting an oil-processing plant. This concern also arises in the context of ongoing peace talks following 8 years of failed aggression against the country.

Furthermore, the Kingdom believes diplomatic discussions with Iran would help solve the matter and avert a military escalation, reflecting a new Saudi policy toward the Islamic Republic following the China-brokered rapprochement deal last March.

However, despite Sanaa also proving that it is capable of causing extensive damage to the UAE, evidently from several previous operations, the Gulf state is urging Washington to launch a military attack on Yemen and to redesignate Ansar Allah as a "terrorist organization".

It is noted that some participating nations in the coalition have preferred to remain anonymous and given the UAE's stance on the matter, questions can be raised concerning concealed participation.

Asian giants opt-out

Fox remarked on the absence of India and focused on China's. This could be because of China's efforts to stabilize the Middle East with several contributing countries, like Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.

In October, Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks with Egyptian Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouli expressing Beijing's commitment to working together to bring "more stability" to the Middle East.

During the meeting in Beijing, President Xi conveyed China's willingness to strengthen cooperation with Egypt, aiming to inject certainty and stability into the region and the world.

Japan also has a destroyer in the region as of November 25, and the Galaxy Leader, a ship seized by the Yemeni Armed Forces, was chartered by a Japanese company, Nippon Yusen, but owned by an Israeli businessman. This could be the reason why Japan did not partake in the coalition, swaying away from what threatened its craft.

US is in for a surprise

Preparing to deal with a large Yemeni arsenal that can target vessels via multiple modes of action, the US-led coalition faces a huge challenge. Fabian Hinz, a research fellow specializing in Middle East defense and military analysis at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank, told Newsweek that the US is already "stretched" with its international commitments.

In detail, the expert stressed that although the US Navy is capable of thwarting anti-ship attacks, it "can't be everywhere all the time."

According to Hinz, the US is faced with a "near impossible task" as it attempts to cover its interests in a huge body of water.

Consistently, the Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) are capable of "harassing" more ships in the Red Sea than the US Navy can "protect", a report by Newsweek highlighted.