A Turning Point in the Yemen Conflict: U.S. Airstrikes Halt, Regional Repercussions, and Yemen’s Continued Alignment with Gaza

A Turning Point in the Yemen Conflict: U.S. Airstrikes Halt, Regional Repercussions, and Yemen’s Continued Alignment with Gaza

    Tuesday, May 06, 2025   No comments

Media Review of Current Events:

In a surprising and consequential move, U.S. President Donald Trump announced the cessation of American airstrikes on Yemen. This development marks a significant shift in U.S. policy in the region and has prompted strong reactions from multiple stakeholders—particularly Israel, whose leadership was caught off guard. The halt comes amid Omani-brokered negotiations and is framed within a broader narrative of de-escalation, albeit with complex undercurrents of continued resistance from Yemen’s Ansar Allah (Houthi) movement against Israeli aggression in Gaza.

The U.S. Halt of Airstrikes and Omani Mediation

Trump’s announcement came during a joint press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, where he claimed that Yemeni forces had made a verbal commitment to cease attacks on ships in the Red Sea. Despite the absence of a formal agreement, the Trump administration interpreted this as a positive development and ordered the U.S. military to stand down. Defense officials confirmed that the military had received instructions to halt operations the previous evening.

This breakthrough was facilitated by Oman, a regional actor known for its neutral diplomatic posture and history of mediating between the U.S. and Yemen. The Omani Foreign Ministry confirmed its successful efforts in brokering a ceasefire agreement that ensures the safety of maritime routes, particularly in the strategic Bab al-Mandeb and Red Sea corridors. Oman praised both sides for their constructive approach and expressed hope that the de-escalation would pave the way for further regional stability.

 "Trump announces the end of the U.S. bombing campaign on Yemen, likely due to disappointing results and high costs" – Politico

The Yemeni Perspective: A Tactical Pause, Not a Strategic Retreat

Yemeni officials, including top political leaders such as Mohammed Ali al-Houthi and Mahdi al-Mashat, responded to Trump’s announcement with guarded optimism but clarified that their resistance remains rooted in principle. Al-Houthi underscored that Yemeni military operations were primarily acts of solidarity with Gaza, undertaken in response to American and Israeli aggression. He described the U.S. halt as a potential tactical victory that "disconnects American support from Israel" and called it a setback for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

A senior member of Ansarullah movement Mohammed Abdul Salam: We did not submit any requests to the Americans, but rather we received messages via our brothers in the Sultanate of Oman.

Echoing this, al-Mashat issued a stern warning to Israel, asserting that Yemen’s support for Gaza would not waver and that retaliation for Israeli attacks on Yemeni infrastructure—including airports and power stations—would be “earth-shaking.” His remarks came after an Israeli airstrike on Sana’a and amid heightened tensions between Yemen and the Israeli military.

Member of the Supreme Political Council in Yemen, Mohammad al-Bukhaiti: "We tell the Americans, the British, and the Zionists that our military operations in support of Gaza will continue, no matter the sacrifices. The Zionists have crossed red lines and must await Yemen's response."

Israeli Shock and Strategic Isolation

The Israeli reaction to the U.S. decision was one of astonishment and concern. According to reports from Israeli media outlets such as Channel 14 and Channel 12, the political establishment in Tel Aviv was blindsided by Trump’s announcement. Analysts suggested that this shift could signify a broader American intention to disengage from direct involvement in regional conflicts, particularly those perceived as primarily serving Israeli strategic interests.

Israeli commentators interpreted the decision as a symbolic abandonment. Channel 12’s Amichai Segal remarked that the move sent a clear message to the region: "Target Israel if you must, but leave us [the U.S.] out of it." This sentiment highlighted fears of growing Israeli isolation in the face of coordinated regional hostility, particularly as Yemen declared it would not relent in targeting Israeli assets.

Moreover, uncertainty lingers in Israel regarding whether the ceasefire includes an implicit U.S. endorsement—or at least tolerance—of Yemeni attacks on Israel, even if American assets are no longer directly involved. Analysts warned that such ambiguity could embolden Iran and its allies, including the Houthis, to escalate attacks against Israeli interests.

Israeli Media:  The United States started bombing Yemen in March, in order to force the Houthis to stop their attacks on Israel. Instead, they started attacking American ships too. Now, suddenly Trump has made peace with them, without involving Israel, throwing away the original intention of the campaign. 

A Conditional Truce and the Resilient Yemeni Stance

While the agreement is framed by the U.S. and Oman as a de-escalatory measure, Yemeni officials have insisted it does not alter their fundamental position. Yemeni Information Minister Dhaifallah al-Shami emphasized in a televised interview that the conflict with the U.S. was merely a consequence of American intervention on behalf of Israel. If the U.S. withdraws, he explained, Yemen would logically stop targeting American ships—but their conflict with Israel remains unchanged.

Al-Shami’s statements clarified that Yemeni attacks on maritime targets began as a response to U.S. airstrikes, not as an independent escalation. With the U.S. potentially stepping away, Yemeni focus may shift entirely back to Israeli targets. He characterized the U.S. decision as a retreat and reaffirmed that Yemeni resistance is fundamentally aimed at countering Israeli aggression and supporting Palestinians in Gaza.

A Shifting Regional Equation

These developments reflect a shifting balance in the Middle East. The U.S. decision to pause airstrikes in Yemen, facilitated by Omani diplomacy, is a notable step toward de-escalation in one arena of conflict. However, the underlying tensions remain, particularly due to Yemen’s unwavering support for Gaza and its framing of the conflict as a broader resistance against what they see as Zionist aggression.

For Israel, the move signifies a strategic recalibration by its closest ally—one that may force Tel Aviv to confront its adversaries with less external military backing than before. For Yemen, the truce with the U.S. is tactical, not strategic; the commitment to Gaza and opposition to what they see as Israeli aggression remain resolute. As the region braces for possible new escalations, the ramifications of this agreement could reverberate far beyond the Red Sea.

Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

    Monday, April 08, 2024   No comments

With news reports about US administration reaching out to Iran with an offer to stop its promise of retaliatory strikes against Israel for the latter's attack on Iran's diplomatic facility in Syria, and with Iran's foreign minister making an unscheduled trip to Oman yesterday, it appears that Biden used the killing of aid workers to mask his anger with Israel crossing a red line and carrying out what is essentially a direct attack on Iran.

There is no doubt that Iran can retaliate directly against Israel. It did so against the US when Trump assassinated Soleimani in January 2020. An Iranian retaliatory attack against Israel could set new course for the entire region, however. 

If Iran attacks Israel directly, the right-wing government in Israel will be forced to retaliate or it will collapse. If it were to retaliate to the retaliation, the armed confrontation enters a new phase, similar to the active front with Hezbollah. That will be catastrophic for Israel for many reasons.

Israel cannot invade Iran and if the US does not get involved directly, all Israel can do is to trade rockets and bombs from distance. That formular favors Iran for many reasons, too.  

First, Iran is a much larger country, and its weapons systems are dispersed all over the country. It will not be possible for Israel to take out all weapons systems. If that was possible, US could have done that in Yemen where a much smaller and less prepared group, the Houthis, have overcome a military Western coalition that has been bombing them for months.

Second, Iran has a formidable array of weapons, rockets and drones, that can be launched for months or even years. In addition to these long-distance weapons, Iran can rely on its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq to provide support.

Iran will respond given that the highest authority in the country already stated that Iran will receive “a slap”. The question is whether US diplomacy will manage to limit Iran’s response to limits of Israel’s attack. That is, an attack on Israeli diplomatic missions and perhaps an attack on military installations in occupied territories to end the cycle. Iran has the option to attack Israel directly because it considers its diplomatic facilities sovereign territories of Iran. However, attacking Israel diplomatic facilities places Iran outside International norms, too, which it has been using to get the world community to condemn it. 

All these factors give credence to the reporting about the US offer to Iran, possibly through Oman. Because all these indicator show that Israel committed a grave mistake when it attacked a diplomatic facility. It may not just US acting to prevent the widening of a conflict, it is likely that Israel wants to limit the damage too. 

The following media reports provide more contect to what might be behind the scene negotiations.

Iranian diplomatic sources say the US is trying to convince Iran not to retaliate against Israel for its bombing of the Iranian embassy in Syria earlier this month, Al-Jarida newspaper reported on 8 April.

The Israeli strike targeted a building attached to the Iranian embassy in Damascus. It led to the killing of the commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, his deputy, and five other IRGC officers.

A source in the Iranian foreign ministry told Al-Jarida that Washington offered Tehran direct negotiations with Tel Aviv to de-escalate the conflict.  

According to the source, Washington will guarantee to persuade Tel Aviv to stop its military operations in Syria and Lebanon on the condition that Iran commit not to retaliate against Israel for the Damascus attack.

At the same time, a diplomatic source in Beirut told Al-Jarida that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected an American proposal to pledge to stop attacks in Syria.

The source added that Iranian leader Ali Khamenei is reviewing the US offer but is not expected to accept it if it does not include guarantees for a comprehensive ceasefire in Gaza and to stop all Israeli and US attacks on Iranian targets or those belonging to Iran's allies in the Axis of Resistance.

The source revealed that the Iranians had also previously received a verbal Israeli proposal via a Gulf state. In the proposal, Tel Aviv claimed it was ready to stop operations against Iranian targets in Syria and Lebanon in exchange for Tehran abandoning retaliation for the killing of Zahedi, whose killing was considered the most significant blow to Iran since the assassination of Qassem Soleimani.

According to the source, the Iranian Foreign Ministry responded to the Israeli message by saying that the proposal must also include a ceasefire in Gaza.

However, some IRGC leaders were unhappy with the foreign ministry's response, viewing the Israeli proposal as a trap. The IRGC leaders argued that any negotiations with Israel must take place only after Iran has retaliated.

The source stated that IRGC commanders believe that Israel's targeting of the Iranian consulate is an opportunity that should not be missed to strike a strong blow at Israel, especially since the consular building in Damascus is considered sovereign Iranian territory and was targeted in a clear violation of international law.

The source said that the IRGC leadership believes Washington will not enter a war with Iran even if it retaliates against Israel. They also consider that an adequately harsh strike against Israel will compel it to accept a ceasefire in Gaza and abandon any plans to invade Lebanon or escalate its bombing in Syria.

Western government continue to lose credibility

Despite the fact that the attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission in Syria violated global treaties including the Vienna Conventions regulating diplomatic and consular relations and the immunities of diplomats and headquarters (1961, 1963, 1969) and the Rome Statute, US government and its Western allies did not explicitly condemn the attack. Instead, they called on Iran to exert “self-restraint.” 

On Thursday, the German Foreign Ministry called, through a statement, on all parties in the Middle East to calm down, exercise restraint, and act responsibly, following a call by Minister Annalena Baerbock who discussed the matter with Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian.

On Thursday, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron warned of “expanding conflicts”. During a phone call with his Iranian counterpart, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, according to a statement by the Iranian Foreign Ministry that was reported by local media outlets, including the private “Tasnim” agency.

According to the agency, the Iranian Foreign Ministry quoted Cameron as saying that he asked Iran to exercise restraint, and said that “lack of restraint on the part of the parties could lead to further expansion of conflicts in the region.”

Regional powers on the other hand voiced condemnation, directly accusing Israel of violating international norms.

Turkey denounced, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the bombing and considered it a violation of international law, warning that the attack may lead to an exacerbation of the conflict in the region.

Saudi Arabia also condemned the targeting in a Foreign Ministry statement, expressing its “categorical rejection of targeting diplomatic facilities for any justification, and under any pretext.”

In a brief Foreign Ministry statement, the UAE condemned “the targeting of the Iranian diplomatic mission in the Syrian capital, Damascus,” without any additional comment.

Qatar also condemned, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack, and considered it “a blatant violation of international agreements and conventions,” stressing “its complete rejection of targeting diplomatic and consular missions and the necessity of providing protection for their employees in accordance with the rules of international law.”

Egypt said, in a statement to the Foreign Ministry, “We categorically reject the attack on diplomatic facilities under any justification, and we stand in solidarity with Syria in respecting its sovereignty and the integrity of its lands and people.”

Kuwait also considered, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack a “flagrant assault,” renewing its call on “the international community and the Security Council to assume its responsibilities towards taking the necessary measures and exerting the necessary efforts to preserve the safety and stability of the countries of the region and reduce tension and escalation.”

In a statement condemning the attack, the Omani Foreign Ministry stressed “the need to stop the escalation in the region and reject aggression and other actions that threaten security and stability,” expressing condolences to the families of the victims and wishing a speedy recovery to the injured.

Iraq also confirmed in a Foreign Ministry statement that the attack “represents a clear and flagrant violation of international law and Syrian sovereignty,” warning that “the expansion of the cycle of violence in the region will lead to more chaos and instability.”

China and Russia, on the other hand, took advantage of Western reluctance to denounce the flouting of international law

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said that his country strongly condemns the Israeli attack and stresses that the security of diplomatic institutions cannot be violated. He stressed in a press conference in Beijing that “China opposes any actions that lead to escalation of tensions in the Middle East region.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday strongly condemned the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate building in the Syrian capital Damascus earlier in the day, denouncing the action as "unacceptable."

"We consider any attacks on diplomatic and consular facilities, the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the relevant Vienna Conventions, to be categorically unacceptable," the ministry said in a statement.

Noting that the attack was carried out in a densely populated metropolitan area with a high risk of mass civilian casualties, the ministry said such "aggressive" actions by Israel are "absolutely unacceptable and must be stopped."

 

US Central Command Statement: "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen; Houthis respond

US Central Command Statement: "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen; Houthis respond

    Monday, January 22, 2024   No comments

After re-listing Houthis as a terrorist entity, US government has signaled that its strikes in Yemen are going to gain some permanence, coining a new name for the operation:  “Operation Poseidon Archer”. Afterwards, the  US Central Command issued a statement, announcing that the "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen."

The full statement from US Central Command:

As part of ongoing international efforts to respond to increased Houthi destabilizing and illegal activities in the region, on Jan. 22 at approximately 11:59 p.m. (Sanaa / Yemen time), U.S. Central Command forces alongside UK Armed Forces, and with the support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands, conducted strikes on 8 Houthi targets in Iranian-backed Houthi terrorist-controlled areas of Yemen. 

These strikes from this multilateral coalition targeted areas in Houthi-controlled Yemen used to attack international merchant vessels and U.S. Navy ships in the region. The targets included missile systems and launchers, air defense systems, radars, and deeply buried weapons storage facilities. 

These strikes are intended to degrade Houthi capability to continue their reckless and unlawful attacks on U.S. and U.K. ships as well as international commercial shipping in the Red Sea, Bab Al-Mandeb Strait, and the Gulf of Aden. These strikes are separate and distinct from the multinational freedom of navigation actions performed under Operation Prosperity Guardian."

The UK followed with its own statement:

UK Defense Security statement. Four British Eurofighter Typhoon fighters conducted strikes against Ansar Allah this evening.

____

Meanwhile, the Yemen government in Sanaa, responded to the new strikes with this statement, posted by Mohammed Albukhaiti. 

This reaction follows a detailed responce issued by the same Yemini official reacting to EU intent to join the US and UK in their war on Sanaa government. The full text of the statement is below.

A message from Mohammed Albukhaiti, senior member and spokesperson of Ansar Allah

My message to the European Union countries regarding their possible participation in a military mission in the Red Sea.

The exceptional state of stability and security that Europe experienced after World War II is a result of the moral values   that prevailed in its societies at the internal level.  However, this moral system began to weaken as a result of the participation of some European countries in the immoral wars that America fought outside its borders.  We are now seeing its effects in the rise of the extreme right and the war in Ukraine.

European societies must realize that moral and human values   are fixed and do not change according to the nationality and religion of a person, and their treatment of them with extreme selectivity that amounts to schizophrenia will expand the scope of wars in the world, which will expand to Europe.

There are genocidal crimes committed every day in Gaza, the majority of whose victims are women and children, in full view of the world, and all countries must take serious action to stop them.

Unfortunately, the movement of some countries with their fleets in support of the perpetrators of genocide and the silence of others is what prompted us to take unilateral military action to stop it, because we had no choice but to do so.

We only target ships linked to Israel, not with the aim of seizing them or sinking them, but with the aim of changing their course to increase the economic cost to Israel as a pressure card to stop its crimes in Gaza and allow the entry of food, medicine and fuel to its besieged residents. This is a legitimate act, especially since we are in a state of war with it.  If the crews of those ships had responded to the instructions of our naval forces, they would not have been detained or bombed.

The steadfastness of the Palestinian people and the military operations of Yemen and Hezbollah against Israel were sufficient to pressure it to stop its crimes, but the American and British support for it, which reached the point of launching an aggression against Yemen, created the conditions for it to continue committing more crimes and expanded the scope of the conflict.

Today there is a war between Yemen, which is struggling to stop the crimes of genocide, and America and Britain, which are fighting to support and protect the perpetrators. It is also clear that the Palestinian people are not ready to surrender, which means that the situation is heading towards escalation.

Instead of European Union countries moving to add more fuel to the fire, they should move seriously to stop the crimes of genocide in Gaza, and then we will stop all our military operations immediately and automatically.

The Palestinian people are being subjected to great injustice to the point of being deprived of the right to live on their land by force of arms. If another human group had been subjected to the injustice that the Palestinians are being subjected to, we would have moved to help them, regardless of their religion or color.

We are not advocates of war, but rather advocates of peace, and it is America and Britain that attacked us, whether in 2015 indirectly or today directly, and we advise the European Union countries not to participate in any aggression against Yemen.

Our keenness to achieve a just and comprehensive peace that guarantees the safety and dignity of all countries and peoples does not mean abandoning our duty to defend the oppressed, nor abandoning our right to self-defense, no matter the sacrifices it costs us. We are prepared to fight until the Day of Resurrection even if the whole world comes together against us."

 

Media Review: Underscoring the risks associated with attacking Yemen, European countries, including France, refused to support it

Media Review: Underscoring the risks associated with attacking Yemen, European countries, including France, refused to support it

    Friday, January 12, 2024   No comments

 Attack on Yemen might be the riskiest action taken by the US administration, and that risk is obvious. France and some other European powers refused to take part in it or even sign on the statement issued after the strike on Yemen that were carried out by the US and UK, and supported by a handful of other nation-states like Bahrain. In Yemen, on the other hand, Houthis government may have gained more support not only from the people living in the territories under its control, but even from territories still under the control of Saudi-backed government.

Some background for this emerging military confrontation between the US and the Sanaa government in Yemen: Houthis-run goverment in Yemen imposed a blockade on commercial ships that either belong to Israel or trading with Israel until the blockade imposed by Israel on Gaza and its war in Gaza are stopped. Although Houthis stated that no other ships will be denied transit, the US insisted that the actions taken by Yemen are threat to global commerce. It acted on this jsutification. After the strike, the Government of Sanaa said that it will retaliate and that it will continue to enforce the blockade until Gazans are allowed food and safety.

Now the aftermath of the attacks and the reaction of worl to it.

The British newspaper "The Telegraph" indicates that Paris refused to work jointly with its Western allies, and did not support the American and British air strikes against Yemen.

An unidentified French official told the British newspaper The Telegraph that Paris “fears that, by joining the US-led strikes, it will lose any influence it has in the talks to defuse tensions between Hezbollah and Israel.” France has focused much of its diplomacy in recent weeks on avoiding escalation in Lebanon.

According to The Telegraph newspaper, France did not sign a statement of support for the US and British air strikes against Yemen, after saying that it “will not participate in air strikes to protect maritime navigation in the Red Sea.”

 

On the other hand, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Korea and Bahrain signed a joint statement supporting the US-British strikes and warning against taking further measures.

 

The Dutch also provided logistical assistance during the strikes, but other major European powers, including France, Spain and Italy, did not provide military or political support.

 

On the other hand, France, along with Italy and Spain, refused to participate in the strikes, and avoided signing a statement supporting them.

 

According to The Telegraph newspaper, Emmanuel Macron's government refrained from joint action with its Western allies against Yemen, in contrast to what happened with it in recent years, in Libya and Syria, when its army participated in repelling ISIS attacks, according to its claim.

 

In turn, the joint commander of the French forces in the Red Sea region, Admiral Emmanuel Sallars, said yesterday, Thursday, that “Paris’ current mandate does not include striking Ansar Allah directly.”

 

The American "Bloomberg" agency reported, in a report, that US President Joe Biden is facing "his biggest test yet regarding his ability to avoid a broader war in the Middle East," in the wake of the American-British aggression against Yemen.

The British Sky News network reported on Friday that the American and British strikes are pushing more Yemenis to support Ansar Allah in Yemen.

According to the British Sky News correspondent, who spoke to people inside Yemen, and they told her how terrified they felt when the British and American missiles fell yesterday, the Yemenis view the United Kingdom and the United States as “igniting the war by supporting the Saudi-led coalition.” .

She pointed out that, after the recent British and American strikes, the Yemenis are increasing their support for Ansar Allah, and “Washington and London do not favor this matter at all.”

The President of the Political Council of Sanaa Government meets the delegations of Saudi Arabia and Oman in Sana'a

The President of the Political Council of Sanaa Government meets the delegations of Saudi Arabia and Oman in Sana'a

    Sunday, April 09, 2023   No comments

 The head of the Supreme Political Council in Yemen, Mahdi Al-Mashat, met with the delegations of Oman and Saudi Arabia in the capital, Sanaa, according to Yemeni media.

During the meeting, Al-Mashat stressed his country's firm position on a just and honorable peace, which the Yemeni people seek and achieve their aspirations for freedom and independence.

He also expressed the gratitude of the Yemeni people for the mediation efforts undertaken by the Sultanate of Oman, its positive role in bringing points of view closer, and its efforts to achieve peace.

For his part, the head of the Saudi delegation expressed his thanks to the Sultanate of Oman for their important role and great efforts in the framework of bringing peace to Yemen, and their keenness to support peace and stability in Yemen.

The meeting was also attended by the head of the national delegation, Muhammad Abdel Salam, the deputy head of the national delegation, Lieutenant General Jalal Al-Ruwaishan, the head of the Security and Intelligence Service, Major General Abdul Hakim Al-Khaiwani, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hussein Al-Ezzi, the member of the national delegation, Abdul-Malik Al-Ajri, and the head of the Military and Security Committee, Major General Abdullah. Yahya Al-Razami.

Yesterday, Saturday, the Omani and Saudi delegation arrived in the Yemeni capital, in order to complete the talks to extend the armistice, after expanding its terms and conditions.

For his part, the head of the Sana'a negotiating delegation, Muhammad Abd al-Salam, announced Sana'a's demands represented in "stopping the aggression, lifting the blockade completely, and disbursing salaries from oil and gas revenues." In addition to these demands, "the exit of foreign forces from Yemen, compensation and reconstruction."

As for the member of the Political Bureau of the Ansar Allah movement, Muhammad Al-Bukhaiti, he revealed, in an interview with Al-Mayadeen, that "there is an understanding with Saudi Arabia," without going into details.

Earlier, a member of the political bureau of the "Ansar Allah" movement, Abd al-Wahhab al-Mahbashi, confirmed that "the Iranian-Saudi agreement is positive, and it will have an impact on the Yemeni file."

A few days ago, Iran welcomed the relative openness resulting from the ceasefire on April 2, 2022, and the limited peace that Yemen witnessed after a long war launched by the United States, whose direct and indirect consequences affected civilians, women, and innocent people.

A sudden meeting between Saudi and Iranian officials in Muscat to discuss important files, on top of which are relations and developments in the region

Today, Sunday, the Saudi ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman, Abdullah bin Saud Al-Anzi, met with his Iranian counterpart, Ali Al-Najafi, in Muscat.

And the Iranian Student Agency, ISNA, reported that “at this meeting, they discussed bilateral relations, developments in the region, and the latest developments in the return of diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.”

Last Thursday, the foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia signed a joint statement, at the end of their talks in the Chinese capital, Beijing, which stipulated the start of arrangements to reopen embassies and consulates and expand bilateral relations and cooperation.

According to the statement, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdullahian agreed with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, to resume the exchange of visits by officials and private sector delegations.

Media Review: The New York Times: The Tehran-Riyadh agreement in Beijing is a great loss for Washington's interests

Media Review: The New York Times: The Tehran-Riyadh agreement in Beijing is a great loss for Washington's interests

    Friday, March 10, 2023   No comments

 A report in the American New York Times spoke about the issue of the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement, which came after Chinese mediation, on the basis of which the first meeting between the two parties was held in Beijing today, Friday.

And the American report considered that "the restoration of Iranian-Saudi relations, as a result of Chinese mediation, is a great loss and doubles the interests of the United States."

The New York Times report added, "The announcement by Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore diplomatic relations between them could lead to a major restoration of order in the Middle East."

It also considered that this rapprochement "represents a geopolitical challenge to the United States and a victory for China, which mediated the talks between the two historical rivals."

The newspaper stated, "It was not immediately clear how the breach announced today, Friday, would affect Saudi Arabia's participation in Israeli and American efforts to confront Iran," but it pointed out that "the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two regional powers represents at least a partial melting of the ice of the Cold War." that shaped the Middle East for a long time.

News of the deal, particularly Beijing's role in mediating it, worried foreign policy hawks in Washington, the report confirms, as Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said, "The renewal of Iranian-Saudi relations as a result of Chinese mediation is a loss, loss, and loss for American interests."

He said it showed that Saudi Arabia "lacks confidence in Washington" and that Iran could isolate US allies "to ease its isolation." It also indicated that China "has become the main sponsor of power politics in the Middle East."

The report concludes that this rapprochement in relations is supposed to affect Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon mainly, and these are the files that witnessed a major conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia regarding the political approach towards them.

Several Arab parties, most notably Egypt, the UAE and Qatar, welcomed the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement, stressing that it would contribute to creating a positive climate in the region and contribute to its stability and security.