Biden administration's stance on Houthi terrorism From Diplomacy to Denial

In a recent article from National Review, the author critiques the Biden administration's reluctance to reclassify the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), despite the group’s aggressive actions and ties to Iran.

The piece argues that the Houthis have demonstrated clear terrorist behaviour, including attacks on Western shipping and missile strikes aimed at Israel. This persistent aggression raises questions about the criteria for FTO designation and highlights the perceived double standards in US foreign policy.

The article traces the evolution of US relations with the Houthis, particularly during the Obama administration, which viewed the group as potential partners amidst a broader diplomatic engagement with Iran. This approach changed with the rise of hostilities in Yemen, particularly after the Houthis rejected US overtures and engaged in direct conflict with Saudi Arabia. Under the Trump administration, the focus shifted back to a more traditional alignment with Saudi interests, but the Biden administration's initial steps included delisting the Houthis as a terrorist group, a move criticized for undermining US allies while appeasing Iran.

The author points out that, despite the Houthis' increasing military capabilities and their clear acts of terrorism—including the use of advanced missiles and drones against Israel—the Biden administration remains hesitant to reconsider their designation. This reluctance is justified by the State Department's argument that such a designation could hinder humanitarian efforts in Yemen, which is currently facing a dire humanitarian crisis.

The article culminates in a poignant question: what more must the Houthis do to earn recognition as terrorists? It suggests that their continued aggressive actions demonstrate a desire for recognition as such, but the administration's response appears detached from these realities. The piece emphasizes the complexity of balancing diplomatic relations with the necessity of confronting genuine threats, ultimately questioning the efficacy and coherence of US foreign policy in the region.

Overall, the article from National Review effectively highlights the tensions within US foreign policy regarding terrorism designations and the implications of those decisions for regional stability and security.