British jets are reportedly gearing up to launch a series of air strikes against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in the wake of recent attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.

Reports first published in The Times suggest that Britain plans to coordinate with Western allies, including the United States and possibly another European nation, to execute targeted missile strikes.

The potential targets include locations in the Red Sea or mainland Yemen, the base of the Houthi rebels.

The decision follows a warning from Grant Shapps, the UK Defence Secretary. On Sunday, Shapps stated, “If the Houthis continue to threaten lives and trade, we will be forced to take the necessary and appropriate action.”

The gravity of the situation is underscored by the planned release of an unprecedented joint statement by the UK and US, warning the Houthis against continued aggression towards commercial vessels.

The Houthi rebels have been actively targeting vessels in the Red Sea, a strategic maritime route. These actions are interpreted as demonstrations of support for Hamas in its conflict with Israel in Gaza.

The repercussions of these attacks have been far-reaching, many shipping companies have resorted to the longer, more expensive route around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope instead of passing through the Suez Canal.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

112 COMMENTS

      • If we had those numbers we could get stuck into them too But it is Iran that finally has to be dealt with. Think the time to do it now is approaching to do it.

        • And before they develop nukes! They’ve tripled enrichment this autumn just passed. they were always going to do this. Obama’s deal was crazy and weak and just made it easier for them to work towards this end goal. Iran needs to be dealt was sooner rather than later and doing it whilst Russia are distracted might also be a good thing

    • Now it’s. Time to get nations capable of deploy ling them Italy could operate it’s own CSG as could the Spanish. But I think a U.K CSG. should be in the the area if not, why have soopadoopa carriers if we can just operate out of akrotiri

    • Nor is a regime the world gained a lot with the removal of Hussein and ghaddafi a few less mad mullahs will be the same.

        • Iran isn’t the same as Iraq, there’s a huge % of the population opposed to the government and very western thinking. The country is really controlled by just a handfull of ruthless extremists mullahs and the basij who do their dirty work. All have their noses in the trough and are highly motivated to keep the status quo

  4. Plenty of options available….Typhoon’s with Storm Shadow, Paveway and Brimstone out of Akrotiri or Oman most likely but Reaper with Paveway & Hellfire is possible and if a SSN is nearby then TLAM.

    HMS Queen Elizabeth could theoretically deploy but it would be a very expensive and time consuming way of getting a handful of F35’s within range that currently only carry Paveway. Sadly not much ‘strike’ in the Carrier Strike Group yet!

    • Paveway 4 is one of the most accurate, flexible and deadly precision guided munitions available. With genuine night/day, all weather precision targeting against fixed and moving targets. The RAF has dropped more of these than any other weapon since its introduction to service. 6 bombs can be dropped to 6 different targets in one pass.

      • That’s the MOD spin… most of those have been dropped in a very permissive environment.

        The reality is it needs the launch aircraft to get so close to its target that air defences can detect it. Completely eliminating the benefits of stealth.

        We are limited to a barely improved weapons fit of a 1980s F117! There is a reason they were retired, it’s a quarter of a century since their vulnerabilities were exposed.

        • It’s from sombody who has worked with these things. Not MOD spin. And they have considerable stand off range for a free falling munition. And as we all know. More weapons are coming to F35B. SPEAR 3 will add the standoff range when that is required. F117 was retired because it was a 40 year old design. Just like all fast jets designs. Technology moves on.

          • Paveway can’t cover enough ground to keep the dropping aircraft out of SAM range. We all know the non US weapons we desperately need won’t be integrated the right side of 2030.

          • F35 is designed to operate in exactly those high threat environments. F35 capability is much more than just the munitions dropped. In any case. Strikes against Houthi targets would most likely be from Typhoons with StormShadow out of RAF Akrotiri. Reaper UCAV or TLAM strikes.

          • Please stop counting your chickens before they are hatched.
            As far as I am aware we have no credible timelines for additional F35B weapons such as Spear3…merely aspirational ones.

            Of course it may be ‘when- and not ‘if ‘but the ‘when’ could be some considerable time away ..esp. if LM commitments are anything to go by.

          • SPEAR3 will be integrated as part of the blk 4 upgrade. The project and integration is funded.

        • I’ not convinced that all the alleged stealth of the 35 is as good as it’s said to be. What if it’s not?Has all our defenc budget been wasted? Astute has been found out not be as good as it was mooted to be. How do I know? We’ll because my son is on the ambush he tells me of prematurely rusting interior systems B AND q lightbulbs and plug sockets and other far more concerning issues.

        • And the cost to operate them. Create the infrastructure from scratch. Basing. Engineering support. Crew’s and engineers would add up to a very large price tag. Better to spend the money on Typhoon and F35 and stick something in the kitty for Tempest.

    • Not sure I want to see us waste expensive and hard to replace TLAM on a bunch of rebels.

      Typhoons out of Oman or Qatar with brimstone on a long term sup-resent style operation much like the fight in Syria seems best.

      Possibly then maintain a MQ9 with hellfire on station.

      As you say though we have lots of options.

      • These “rebels” control about three quarters of the Yemini population, and significant territory including the capital. The Houthis are effectively the government. We only still call them rebels because the are backed by Iran and the Saudis wouldn’t like their chosen faction being delegitimised.

        • Is it time to recognise the houtis as the actual government? Is there a reason they haven’t taken over the complete country yet? Or perhaps the country needs split like it used to be? Would any of those things stop the violence for the civilians unlucky enough to still be there is also an unknown.
          Knowing not much about the country there could be all sorts of reasons why those are terrible ideas.

          • Given they are launching missile attacks against neutral shipping, I would say that the answer is probably no to recognising the Houthis. I doubt a split is the option, at best you end up with Korea and at worst a war with both sides having full tax and government powers.

          • When we pander to terrorists, we empower them and others no,the western nations should have built new airbases in the region. While we were there.

          • Not a good idea to recognise any group as a legitimate government when they came to power by force.

        • As long as the pilots aren’t gay or they’d need flogging before taking of. The u.k in particular should wash. It’s hands on the middle east.stay out of it concentrate on bigger issues

    • A detachment of 3/6 Thypoon to Oman will be the name of the game, possibly 6 Thypoon a few Reapers and a Tanker.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they had already moved a half SAS Squadron plus SF support to Oman too.

      Definitely time to take the gloves off and start educating them in the error of their ways…..

    • Not only that but I doubt the RN would be able to get together a couple of destroys/frigates to escort her out there as the Eastern Med would probably need?

  5. Avoiding escalation is important, but forever turning the other cheek also a no no.

    Speak softly, carry a big stick. God bless our pilots if they’re about to deploy.

    • More expensive, more risk of collateral damage. Stuff like Brimstone is the new weapon of choice; you don’t need to take down the tower block to kill the sniper. The near-zero risk (I would assume) to the aircraft also means they can get closer to identify targets positively so minimise embarrassing accidents that would further inflame tensions.

    • What is the risk to the pilots though? Does this group have any anti air capability?

      I have my doubts that dropping a few bombs is going to do much, considering they are operating over a massive territory and using ships that will blur into the civilian fleet.

      I suspect this is more about being perceived to be doing something than anything else.

      • Bearing in mind this group is sponsored by Iran and have ballistic missiles, I would expect them to have SAMs of one type or another….

        • I thought they were using relatively short range drones rather than missiles?

          I suspect what will happen if it does is special forces on the ground will laser mark the targets and the jets fire off from stand off and safe range. Will min risk of hitting the wrong targets and reduce risk of losses.

          • They fired a MRBM at Israel that was shot down by Arrow 3. They may have got a one off package especially to hit Israel and to scare the West, but I suspect Iran will at least have enabled them to defend the launch sites. How well the kit is maintained and operated is a separate matter.

          • I suspect this is why most of the major nations are not supporting the move. Combo of no UN mandate and different views on what not having troops on the ground mean.

          • The U.N is a bloated bureaucracy. It did nothing during the Ukraine, it won’t have anything to do with this issue there is no process where a nation can leave the U.N,if there wad it would be half the size it is now.

          • UN has its flaws, especially that certain nations have vetoes but it does a really good job at ensuring counties talk to each other and consider impact of international law. No nation would ever leave as it would mean their voice would not be heard.

            If any nation was serious about leaving they could just not turn up and yet they do.

      • I think you are looking at long term sup-resent measures having aircraft over head on a constant basis ready to take out anti ship missile launchers as they appear.

    • I suppose we would rather warn the Houthis and they stop than both lose ships and waste missiles. The aim is not their destruction (though that would be nice) but to end attacks on shipping.

    • Agree, broadcasting ones intentions before doing anything seems a bit disadvantageous. The Houthis don’t give anybody nice press releases. Hope Special Forces maybe can help with getting some of the terrorists of some of these captured ships.

      • The intention should be, to remove the mad mullahs and the rest of the despotic regime in Iran once and for all

    • I think I may be a Defence junkie. I watched the fireworks at New Years and thought what a waste of gunpowder. All those explosions; surely we could exploit that militarily. Then I realised. I’m pissed again.

  9. I’m guessing Egypt will be involved, considering they will lose revenue from the ships being diverted away from the Suez Canal. Their revenue peaked at $9.4 billion in June from Suez’s revenue.

  11. Are the attacks only happening as long as Israel is doing its Gaza ops? I haven’t looked at what they said or why they are attacking ships apart from its Israel’s fault.
    It’s a difficult road to go down. The Saudi coalition tried bombing the poop out of them already.

  12. There is no way the UK will strike Houthi targets unless it does so jointly with the US. The UK doesn’t have the naval strength to deal with the consequences of any such action without involving the US. Right now, the US, for a number of reasons, has refused to strike the Houthis. Most prominent is the fact that Saudi Arabia was bloodied in Yemen and has lost its appetite for confrontation with the Houthis. The Houthis control northern Yemen with an iron fist and aren’t about to be dislodged by anything other than a ground operation by the US/Allies. The Houthis are religious fanatics who glory in the fact that they are at war with Israel. They are willing to absorb missile strikes and the concurrent casualties and continue to carry on their attacks on shipping. The Houthis may, in the future, escalate and force the US’s hand but, for now, the US sees a naval defensive patrol as the best of some very bad options.

    • Ummm… er… perhaps, but helicopters from Ike were forced to sink three Houthi small boats today, after being fired upon. Believe that may validate one of the corollaries of Murphy’s Laws of War, specifically, “No plan survives first contact w/ the enemy.” Events unfolding in the near term will dictate whether it is time to lock and load. BTW, perhaps it would be best not to denigrate the contribution of the Brits; the RN is the only other service currently providing a real, tangible contribution to the ‘coalition.’ Uncle Sugar does not enjoy the benefit of an overabundance of meaningful allies at the moment. 🤔😳

      • The U.K. is more than capable of dropping ordnance on positions in Yemen. They aren’t able to strike back at the U.K. and with no boots on the ground it’s all one sided. Even a few reapers and typhoons can do a lot of damage.
        Now is it worth it? Not sold on that idea. How big is the target list and what type of targets are they going after?
        The aftermath of the strikes could be a lot more to deal with for any U.K. forces in the region as well as the civilian assets, population.

        • Yes, we are. And most nations.
          It wasn’t the capability of our forces I doubt, I never do that, as we are one of the most capable.

          What I doubt is our political classes resolve. We don’t do this stuff alone any more post empire, unless it involved ,a British territory.

          And if the US were not there we’d be hiding, as we lack the numbers for a sustained mission and to deal with the aftermath, let’s not kid ourselves.

          Which was the main point that I was agreeing with Daniel. I myself do think It is worth it, this cannot be allowed to continue without some sort of response.

    • Realistic post. Intel is needed. We need to target the logistics paths and assembly locations of the drones, cruise missiles and ballistics missiles. These don’t spring out of no-where; they are all supplied from Iran

    • Why is a U.KCSG not deployed what’s the point of having one? We can afford to send one of our few T45 To the region, the u.kCSG should be there too.plus20 or so tornado at akrotiri.

  13. UK to launch it’s own air strikes? Bravo! Houthi rebels? US, UK, Europe – 24 hour job. Do it properly. Eradicate the threat. Iran next.

    • Steer a shadow up the ayatollah toilet. That’s the way to sort out those trouble making ragheads that blot on the bum of humanity has been needed scrubbing for too long.

      • It depends on how much we know about positions. We could do an ISIS style series of airstrikes, with prior knowledge about the positions of a high command, launchers and drone depots, and incapacitate the ability to strike shipping relatively cheaply. However, with Iran behind them we will only see a new delivery of SRBMs and drones and the cycle will begin again.

  15. Happy New Year to everyone!
    This attack is long overdue. We should deploy a CSG and submarines to the Indian Ocean so they can be blooded. Let the F35 do it’s thing. Tease the Iranians out of port too. After all, they are the real problem so let’s give them hell.

  16. It’s 0800hrs here in the UK. Despite all the hype surrounding the Times report no RAF attacks on the Houthi have been announced. Stand down eveyone

  17. There’s only one way for us the attack the rebel scum…with my newly constructed Death Star.

    The British Empire Strikes Back, 2024

  18. Well at least we’ve warned them that we’re on the way so they can disperse and move their assets out of the firing line, activate any AA defences that they have, and allow a few token empty camps to be destroyed.

  19. It crosses my mind what will the legal basis be for these attacks, since I am not aware of a UN mandate that allows attacks into Yeman. Has the Yeman government signed off on it?

    • When Sleepy Joe called for an end to the war in Yemen he effectively created a new country of Western Yemen. The UK also called for an “inclusive peace process under UN auspices”. Peace with the current territorial split means the Houthis are the Western Yemini government, and if they are attacking British shipping that’s a casus belli.

      Everybody wants peace, but not peace at any price, and that price shouldn;’t include the creation of a Iranian-backed terrorist nation organised along the same lines as Hezbolla. It won’t mean stabilising the region, rather it will create another base for world instability.

      • I’m not sure that provides for a legal basis for an attack on yeman territory. Houthis is not a country or a internationally recognised government and therefore can not undertake an act of war. They can undertake an act of terrorism but that is different. Same reason there was a need for a un mandate to go into afgan as it wasn’t the government of the country that attacked the US it was a terror group they housed. I could be wrong, I’m far from an expert on international law.

        If yeman approve it then it’s an easier topic

        • You are probably right. I don’t know if the UN brokered cease-fire gives a de jure status to the Houthis or not. Human Rights Watch state:

          While international humanitarian law provides no guidance on whether an entity such as the Houthis represents the Yemeni state, as a matter of general international law, the Houthi authority does not appear to meet the requirements of statehood.

          All that means is that any conflict with the Houthis falls under the law on non-international armed conflict, which means we still have to abide by the Geneva convention (even if they don’t). The condition seems to be “non-state armed groups must exhibit sufficient organization and control to be capable of sustaining military operations and adhering to international humanitarian law, so they can be considered parties to the conflict.” There’s no doubt in my mind the Houthi’s pass that benchmark so I think warring against them has a basis in law.

          This is just an opinion formed after a bit of web-searching last week and it’s very possibly tosh!

          However, unlike when the Saudi’s “helped” the Yemini government in 2015, we can call on Article 51 directly. We are being attacked.

          Article 51

          Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

          • I suspect its not very straight forward, as attacking them as a group is potentially permitted but to do it you have to launch attacks against a yeman owned land and people. Its like the Uk launching attacks on the IRA within Ireland, it would have been an act of war against Ireland even if the country wasn’t the target.

    • The initial legal response I believe would be an act to stop piracy and the ability to conduct further piracy off the coast of Yemen. The attacks on Israel from Yemen are a totally different subject.

      “The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides the framework for the repression of piracy under international law, in particular in its articles 100 to 107 and 110.”

      These UN articles have been reaffirmed by not only the Security Council but also by the General Assembly. They allow a State to act against the acts of piracy. But also to act to prevent the logistics of piracy. However, the caveat on this is that the logistics have to be clearly identified as supporting the act of piracy. But as the Houthis have used drones, anti-ship missiles and anti-ship ballistic missiles; along with small boats and a helicopter to enable them to attack and take control of merchant shipping. Which comes under the definition of piracy. Legally this could give the “UK, US and others Protection Force” either the right to seize these assets or a broad target set that they can legally attack to prevent future acts of piracy.

      However, the UN definition of piracy does not cover state sponsored piracy, only by private actors. Plus the State, as in the Houthis controlled part of Yemen is not recognized by the UN. So it falls outside the scope of UNCLOS. Where it now becomes a grey area under UN law.

      • Isn’t that just piracy in International water? So fine to deal with the boats when they attack someone but more problematic going after their bases

        • Yes it is, but as shown when the helicopter landed with the troops to take the ship, or the recent attacks by small boats. Theses assets are all flying or displaying the Houthis flag. Which sort of makes them a State actor. Hence the now grey area. By rights the Houthis as State actors, are enacting an act of war on commercial shipping, as they aren’t holding the crews/ships for ransom or for straight theft. Which could be another legal avenue to follow, but that would mean recognizing the Houthis controlled Yemen as a legal State. Which is not something the UN are prepared to do.

          Going after the Houthis assets that have been used to support piracy is going to be difficult, but not impossible. The helicopter would be easy to find and identify, as would be the small boats. Missile launch sites and their supporting radars and control centres, would be a lot harder to identify as being used for the act of piracy. However, again this is not undoable, as 24/7 surveillance can be used for this. Unless it is decided that all these assets provide a threat to shipping, so must be taken out.

  20. Bomb them back to the stone age, shouldn’t take long, they are barely progressed beyond it anyway! They are terrorist scum who don’t deserve anything less. The ukraine war happened because the west appeared weak (and the US arms industry saw a fantastic business opportunity), we need to show some backbone for a change!

  23. Excuse my cynicism, but it’s 2400 kms from Cyprus to Sana’a. Longer than Tel Aviv to Tehran.

    Can Typhoon really do that, bombed up with Storm Shadow? or could the Typhoon “from Cyprus” actually be going via Saudi or even Oman. Both close allies. Plausible deniability

  24. The situation is not simple. The US is being cautious about strikes on the Houthi, who have in fact shot down US MQ9 drones on 3 previous occasions. I believe all of the cruise missiles, the slow drones and the ballistic missiles are launched from mobile trucks. Persistent surveillance with Predator + Hellfire or LGB would be the obvious choice were it were not the case that the Houthis can detect and shoot down Predator type drones. Land based Typhoons or carrier based F-18s would need to know where the (mobile) target is. Maybe the drone assembly locations or the missile warehouses or logistics routes make more sense. I see the Iranians have sent a frigate into the Red Sea to ‘help’ the US coalition ensure safe passage of merchant ships 🙂 This is proving to be some chess game.

  26. Why mess around with the ‘puppets’? Iran is behind this, so any ultimatum should be delivered directly to them, and as soon as possible.

  27. Why is it down to just .
    allied intervention when there are plenty of well armed Arab nations on the doorstep? I can only assume they are part of any allied response but with the size of their air forces,they don’t actually need help to protect their oil/gas shipping.

  28. With what from where? All the tornados which. Woul excel in this kind of environment are gone Cyprus is a very long way away and our much hypedCSG will still be at home doing f’ all

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here