اليكم الان “Israel,” the Absent Present in the War on Yemen… A Reading of the Strategy and the Calculations of the Confrontation والان إلى التفاصيل من المصدر الخبر اليمني
sharhabil Al-Ghareeb|The confrontation in Yemen is no longer merely a confrontation within Yemen’s geography or linked to the security of maritime navigation in the Red Sea, but has become part of a regional conflict in which military and security calculations intertwine with projects supported by America and “Israel” to reshape the region.The Israeli approach here is summarized in an attempt to exploit the Yemeni-Saudi crisis as a gateway to impose a new political reality, and it does not view the Ansar Allah front in isolation from the Iran front, but considers it part of a regional deterrence equation that it seeks to weaken or eliminate, in preparation for targeting Iran again and changing the balance of power in the region.This approach acquires additional great importance in light of what US President Donald Trump stated regarding “Israel” providing intelligence assistance to Saudi Arabia in confronting Ansar Allah in Yemen, in conjunction with his talk about the return of talk about the Saudi-Israeli normalization agreements to the discussion table.These data, and what preceded them of the incident of the landing of the plane carrying Israelis recently in Saudi Arabia, whose reality and artificial fabrication in this manner many questioned, raise questions about the employment of Saudi-Israeli security cooperation to revive the stumbling normalization track, and build regional arrangements that serve the interests of “Israel” first and foremost.To understand the Israeli position more, we must stop before all these data, to read their security, political, and strategic dimensions, and to look at the Yemeni confrontation as an essential part of a broader struggle over influence and the future of the region’s shape.There are four foundations that can be paused at to analyze this scene, after much information was revealed, the last of which was President Trump’s statements regarding “Israel” helping Saudi Arabia and the return of talk about the normalization agreements.First: The Security Foundation“Israel” views the nature of the confrontation as a security laboratory, and does not separate between Iran and the Yemen front as two separate fronts, but views them as one front, and deals with the conflict as a real security test of the capabilities of Ansar Allah and the capabilities of Iran alike, whether at the level of missile capabilities or drone systems and other military means.This confrontation provides “Israel” with a great opportunity to assess the nature of the capabilities and threats, as the expertise extracted from this confrontation can contribute to determining its security options if it decides to launch a new military attack on Iran, and it is hinting at that.Second: The Strategic Foundation“Israel” proceeds from this foundation by not separating between the Yemeni and Iranian fronts, and considers that the ongoing confrontation is an integral part of its vision to dismantle the axis of resistance led by Iran. In a deeper sense, “Israel” is greatly concerned with weakening the Ansar Allah group in Yemen, whether politically or militarily, and sees that this falls within a broader strategy aimed at reducing Iranian influence, dismantling the axis of resistance, and weakening its components and their ability to act within the fronts of the axis as a whole.“Israel” views Ansar Allah as an important component in the axis of resistance, because of the military capabilities it possesses that enable it to influence the security of the Red Sea and international navigation, in addition to its capabilities to target the Israeli depth during the support of Gaza in the Al-Aqsa Flood battle.On the other angle of the picture, the exit of Iran and the Ansar Allah group from this confrontation with strategic gains does not serve at all the Israeli vision aimed at weakening the axis of resistance, but may reinforce the belief in the possibility of challenging Israeli military superiority and imposing new equations in the region.Third: The Foundation of Israel’s Positioning in the Region“Israel” views the ongoing confrontation between the Ansar Allah group and Saudi Arabia as an important opportunity to reposition geopolitically in the region. In this framework, the declared Israeli positions regarding the security of Saudi Arabia acquire particular importance, and what was published about Netanyahu’s proposal to provide military and security assistance to it, and what President Trump confirmed and revealed on this subject; because they reflect the reality of “Israel’s” role in providing intelligence assistance as a security partner for Saudi Arabia, capable of contributing to confronting common regional threats.From another angle, “Israel” deals with these developments as an essential entry point to revive the stumbling normalization track with Saudi Arabia, and to prepare the political and security conditions to build a broader regional alliance in the face of Iran. Thus, the importance of Yemen in the Israeli calculations is not limited to the nature of the military confrontation, but extends to the possibility of investing it in rearranging relations and alliances, and consecrating a new political reality that grants “Israel” a broader presence in the regional security equations to confront Iran.Fourth: The Foundation of the United States of AmericaThis foundation reflects the importance of the American role in determining the nature of the confrontation between Ansar Allah and Saudi Arabia, and the extent of Washington’s readiness for direct intervention or contenting itself with providing political, military, and intelligence support. Any decline in direct American engagement will push “Israel” to strengthen its military, security, strategic, and political independence, and expand its ability to influence regional conflicts without complete reliance on the American umbrella.In this context, “Israel” is given an opportunity to test its ability to move more independently, develop direct security relations with regional parties, and expand the scope of its influence in the ongoing interactions between Yemen and Saudi Arabia. This does not necessarily mean a decline in the Israeli-American alliance, but may reflect a trend toward distributing roles, so that America retains its central role in supporting “Israel” politically and militarily, while “Israel” bears greater responsibilities in managing some confrontations and threats and dealing with them.The importance of the Yemeni front lies in its ability to impose security challenges that transcend the borders of geography, and to force “Israel” to disperse its resources on multiple fronts. Therefore, the Israeli goal of weakening Ansar Allah in Yemen serves a broader Israeli goal of improving its position if it decides to attack Iran.It is true that the capabilities differ, but the importance of Yemen stems from its geographical location and its ability to influence the security of the Red Sea. The important new development after President Trump’s statements, in light of the continuation of the Yemeni crisis, places the future of Saudi normalization again on the table, and the coincidence of the talk about Israeli intelligence assistance to Saudi Arabia indicates the increasing possibilities of employing Saudi Arabia’s security fears to accelerate the political rapprochement between “Israel” and Saudi Arabia.In a deep reading of what happened in this field, it indicates that “Israel” is striving and working to present itself as a security partner in the face of Iran, which allows it to expand its regional presence and turn security cooperation into an entry point and gateway for broader strategic arrangements.Another scenario that may happen, in light of Saudi Arabia’s declared positions on the Palestinian cause, is that intelligence coordination remains in place, and may expand to more than it is now, without reaching a full political and military alliance toward comprehensive normalization. Therefore, the chances of normalization will remain linked to the extent of the price that Riyadh will pay in exchange for what is provided to it of intelligence services to confront Ansar Allah in Yemen if the confrontation expands further, and all of this is also dependent on the American position that strongly supports bringing about a breakthrough in the political file between Saudi Arabia and “Israel,” which is what President Trump talked about in his recent statements.As for the expected outcomes in this direction, it is likely that “Israel” will proceed to employ the Yemeni confrontation with Saudi Arabia to develop its intelligence capabilities and enhance and expand its security cooperation, while maintaining its desire to advance in the political path of normalization with Saudi Arabia and seize the opportunity to achieve that. However, on the other angle of the picture, the military option against Iran will remain strongly present.Therefore, the results of this strategy will depend on the ability of the Ansar Allah group in Yemen to maintain its capabilities, and the extent of the cohesion of the fronts of the axis of resistance. In light of such circumstances, attempts to push Saudi-Israeli normalization may be renewed at any stage, but this point specifically will remain governed by Riyadh’s calculations and the Palestinian cause. Will it bypass this point or will it remain adhering to it? Until now, I believe that there is a state of great satisfaction with the Israeli intelligence services provided to it, but the question that poses itself is: Will Saudi Arabia remain adhering to its position or will it slip and submit to blackmail and political pressure?On the other hand, the direct military confrontation with Iran will remain linked to Netanyahu’s political calculations in this period before the elections, taking into account the calculations of cost and risks resulting from the scenario of the expansion of the war, and this will be within the calculations of the results of what is happening on the Yemeni front.The Israeli approach toward Yemen goes beyond confronting the military capabilities of Ansar Allah, to target the weakening of the regional deterrence system linked to Iran in the region. This goal is exposed, by the way, and aims primarily to reshape alliances in a way that serves the interests of “Israel.” However, these calculations collide with the fact that Yemen isn’t a marginal front in the axis of resistance but an essential and important one, and that Iran is not an easy state that can be subjugated by merely pressuring Yemen.The Ansar Allah group possesses an influential geographical location and capabilities that enable it to impose challenges on the Israeli calculations first and foremost, while Iran represents a regional power of important status and its options are also multiple, and thus the war and the siege imposed on it have proven. Therefore, “Israel’s” success in weakening any front of the fronts of the axis of resistance does not necessarily mean “Israel” achieving its strategic objectives.Therefore, the Israeli bet on neutralizing the Yemen front or weakening it in preparation for besieging Iran may turn into a strategic dilemma in the face of “Israel”; for military power can bombard and destroy but doesn’t guarantee achieving objectives completely, and also the targeting of the other resistance fronts does not necessarily mean success in dismantling them, as they automatically rebuild themselves, and this is part of the doctrine of the resistance and its axis.Therefore, the scene will continue to say that the ability of Ansar Allah to steadfastness, and the ability of Iran to manage the confrontation and also to steadfastness despite the magnitude of the conspiracy and the challenges, constitute two influential factors in preventing the imposition of unilateral regional equations that serve “Israel” at the expense of the peoples of the region and their causes.The scene in Yemen says that the real test is not the size of the intelligence coordination with Saudi Arabia or the size of the aerial strikes to which Yemen is subjected, but the ability to turn this pressure into a political achievement in any political effort made. As for until now, on the part of “Israel,” it hasn’t succeeded in that.The military confrontation has proven that the Yemeni capabilities can impose challenges that exceed traditional possibilities, while Iran represents an essential factor in the equations of regional power with what it possesses of strategic capabilities and options. Therefore, any attempt to dismantle this equation will face difficult tests related to the ability of “Israel” to bear the cost of the confrontation in a region that aspires to have a major geopolitical role but is still unable to achieve that.Source: “Al-Mayadeen Net”
“Israel,” the Absent Present in the War on Yemen… A Reading of the Strategy and the Calculations of the Confrontation first appeared on الخبر اليمني.
israel the absent present in the war on yemen a reading of the strategy and the calculations
المزيد من التفاصيل - اضغط هنا
الخبر اليمني israel the absent present in the war on yemen a
كانت هذه تفاصيل “Israel,” the Absent Present in the War on Yemen… A Reading of the Strategy and the Calculations of the Confrontation نرجوا بأن نكون قد وفقنا بإعطائك التفاصيل والمعلومات الكامله .
وننوه بأن الموضوع الأصلي قد تم نشرة ومتواجد على الخبر اليمني و قام فريق العمل في برسبي نيوز بالتاكد منه او ربما تم التعديل علية او قد يكون تم نقله بالكامل اوالاقتباس ويمكنك قراءة الموضوع من مصدره الاساسي.