On January 21, 2024, Mohammad Ali al-Houthi, a member of the Yemeni Ansarallah resistance movement’s Supreme Political Council, emphasized that numerous commercial vessels, unrelated to Israel or destined for Israeli ports, have been permitted to traverse the Red Sea unharmed.
You can also read: Guterres Calls on G-77 to Lead Global Governance Reform
Highlighting this strategic approach, Houthi pointed out, “You can refer to the Tanker Trackers website, dedicated to ship tracking, to observe that the most straightforward method for ships to navigate the Red Sea safely is by announcing the phrase ‘We have no relation to Israel’ on their automated identification system.” He went on to assert the efficacy of this tactic, revealing, “This solution has proven its effectiveness, with 64 ships securely passing through the sea by employing this phrase.”
“VL NO CONTACT ISRAEL” Emerges as Red Sea Defense Strategy
Adding weight to these statements, senior Ansarallah official Muhammad al-Bukhaiti asserted on January 19, 2024, that Russian and Chinese vessels traversing the Red Sea would be immune to threats as long as they maintained no association with Israel.
These disclosures come in the wake of reports that various ships, including those from China, Cameroon, and Singapore, among other nations, have successfully averted potential attacks by transmitting the message ‘We have no relation to Israel’ through their identification systems.
In a notable incident earlier this month, the Saudi tanker Desert Rose safeguarded its journey through the Red Sea by displaying the message ‘VL NO CONTACT ISRAEL’ on its identification system.
The backdrop of these measures is a series of actions undertaken by Yemen’s Armed Forces and Ansarallah since November 2023, where they seized an Israeli-linked vessel and targeted more than a dozen others. These operations serve as a poignant display of solidarity with the Palestinian resistance, a commitment that Yemen has vowed to uphold until the cessation of the war and siege in Gaza.
Yemen has consistently clarified its stance, reiterating that non-Israeli linked ships or those not destined for Israeli ports will not be targeted. Ansarallah spokesman Muhammad Abdel Salam emphasized on January 16, 2024, “We reiterate that there is no ban on any ship except those linked to the criminal Zionist enemy or those heading to its ports in occupied Palestine.”
However, the recent aggressive actions against Yemen by Washington and London in the ongoing month have placed US and British vessels in a precarious situation, adding a climactic dimension to the unfolding events in the region.
US and UK Ships in the Crosshairs
Amid escalating tensions, Ansarallah and the Yemeni army have retaliated against recent US and British airstrikes on Yemen. In response to these actions, Ansarallah leader Abdel Malik al-Houthi declared on January 18, 2024, that their operations would target American and British ships, emphasizing that the aggression by the US and UK would not alter their stance.
The strategic significance of the Red Sea, a vital route for global oil and fuel shipments, adds complexity to the situation. Functioning as a key transit route between Egypt’s Suez Canal and the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea allows ships to bypass the more costly and lengthy journey along the southern coast of Africa.
Adding to the gravity of the situation, the Houthi group claimed responsibility for an attack on a US Army cargo ship in the Gulf of Aden the previous Monday. Houthi spokesman Yahya Saree revealed that the OCEAN JAZZ ship was targeted with naval missiles, citing the attack as a response to the American-British aggression against Yemen and in support of the oppressed Palestinian people.
Saree issued a stern warning, stating, “The response to the American and British attacks is inevitably coming, and any new attack will not go unanswered.”
The Houthis assert that their attacks are a means of pressuring Israel to cease its deadly offensive on the Gaza Strip.
Turning Off IDs and Disavowing Israel
The climax started to take place after January 7, when a stark warning was issued by Mohamed al-Houthi, a member of the Iran-backed group’s Supreme Political Council, stipulating that any ship navigating the Red Sea must incorporate the phrase “we have no relationship with Israel” on their identification systems or face the risk of attack.
This proclamation, ostensibly framed as a show of solidarity with the people of Gaza, has compelled ships from diverse locations, including China, Cameroon, Panama, and Singapore, to comply with the demand, ensuring a purportedly safe passage through the Red Sea route.
Simultaneously, recent revelations have surfaced, indicating that multiple ship insurers are beginning to sidestep coverage for US, UK, and Israeli merchant ships against war risks in the southern Red Sea. Reports suggest that underwriters are inserting clauses into insurance schemes explicitly stating “no Israeli involvement.”
In a complex twist, the US-led anti-Houthi Combined Maritime Forces have issued a plea for ships to steer clear of Bab al-Mandab at all costs during the peak of the attacks on shipping. Despite this advisory, certain vessels persist in using this crucial trade route. To mitigate the looming threat of attack, some ships have resorted to turning off their identification systems or employing phrases that disassociate themselves from Israel.
29 Strikes on Merchant Ships Since November
Since November, Houthi rebels have unleashed a relentless assault on merchant ships, employing drones and missiles in at least 29 strikes. Their declared motive centers around imposing a self-imposed blockade on Israel via Red Sea shipping, a response, they assert, to Israel’s war and siege on Gaza.
In a volatile escalation, the US and UK executed “retaliatory” air and naval strikes on Houthi positions in Yemen. Undeterred, the Houthis, resolute in their vow to retaliate, intensified their assaults on vessels. Ballistic missiles targeted two US-owned carriers, and a Greek-owned bulk carrier also fell victim to their relentless attacks.
This provocation, in turn, triggered further reprisals from the US and UK, plunging Yemen deeper into the throes of conflict. The backdrop of this strife dates back to 2014 when the Houthis seized control of the capital, Sanaa, compelling rebels to retreat southward. In response, a Saudi-led coalition initiated airstrikes against rebel-held positions from 2015 onward, resulting in the tragic loss of thousands of civilian lives.
While a semblance of truce emerged between Saudi Arabia and Yemen, recent events have strained diplomatic ties, with Riyadh openly criticizing the US-UK strikes on Yemen.
